Gioteck discuss if backwards compatibility is going to become more of an issue in this console transition when compared to previous generational leaps.
Depends from person to person, If someone has 40-50 games purchased on a system then yes it will matter to them. As the games alone would have cost them 2-3K USD, thats alot of money. Specially i think graphics this gen have gotten to a point where they were really good. The jump to next gen wont be as big as it was in previous gens. Hence people wont find older games unplayble. Which is why i feel BC is becoming more and more important.
it matters and id be willing to pay 600quid for a ps4 that plays ps1,ps2 and ps3 discs and digital games. the truth is though that i wont be playing these past games for very long though because ill be playing ps4 games mostly
I'd also be willing to pay extra for backwards compatibility, to cover the cost of putting the necessary hardware inside the new consoles. Really, Sony and Microsoft need to realize that it's very important to some people and if it's too expensive to put in every console, then just release a more expensive SKU with BC included and charge enough to cover the cost, that way everyone wins.
it depends on the type of BC. I would not expect the latest platform to support all games from all other previous platforms from the same company, but to have at least 1 generational level of BC isnt that much to ask for. others may say it compromises the new platform by having to account for older games which could be true/false depending on how the BC is achieved. If it is something direct then there isnt much lost nor is there any compromises. Like looking at the PS2 was certainly capable of running PS1 games. The hardware was capable and the optical format of the PS2 started off as CD but gradually moved to DVD. There was a portion of the system set aside for such that reason. It was a smart move by Sony as they knew the sheer amount of PS1 games on the market would be a benefit to the consumer to be able to buy the new system AND be able to play all their existing games on one unit. Even nintendo has always maintained some level of platform BC with each new gameboy released. It wasnt until the wii that we had console level BC with gamecube games just as the wii-u supports wii games. It doenst support GC games but it still has that 1 prior platform level of BC to be a convenience for consumers. I see BC as a major selling point to those who dont have the current platform. Meaning someone who doesnt have a PS3 and they are looking at the Ps3 on the shelf next to the PS4. The PS4 (if it had PS3 BC) is the more attractive option because it can not only play all the new PS4 games but also the hundreds of existing PS3 games. We can even go back further. If given the choice to buy the 2600 or the 7800 which do you think is the better deal? Yeah i know...its atari but even they had BC back in the day.
It matters when you've purchased digital versions of games, which you can't sell or store in box in your closet.
i agree with you, speaking about myself i have over 65 360 games and over 70 ps3 games, and about half of them i havent played yet.. i have a very big backlog @ jimbobwahey "Really, Sony and Microsoft need to realize that it's very important to some people and if it's too expensive to put in every console, then just release a more expensive SKU with BC included and charge enough to cover the cost, that way everyone wins." if they had a model that had BC included i would jump to next gen during the launch but as it stands my backlog of games is too big to jump into another console
Yeah, same here. If I can buy a BC PS4 and next Xbox, I'll make the jump to next gen at launch. If I can't though? I'll stick with my PS3 and 360. I've got no desire to have four different consoles under my TV, that's utterly ridiculous, and I've so many games for these two consoles that I enjoy that I don't intend to abandon them for new hardware that will have what, maybe three good launch games if we're lucky? New consoles always have a severe lack of worthwhile games for the first year after launch, and consoles having backwards compatibility makes this a non-issue since you can still play your older games too, which makes the transition from old to new much easier on people. Not having BC is just crazy. Besides, a lot of people sell their old consoles to help fund the purchase of new ones.
I wouldn't mind paying either mostly because like you said I'd be having to large game systems in my room and I don't want to abandon the PS3 in favor of the PS4 because it's too big to abandon.
I have 155 (30 unfinished) PS3 games and it doesnt matter to me much. I'll be keeping my ps3 until i finish these games at which point i'll sell my ps3 and put the games up for storage.
As consumers, we are being asked to invest and TRUST in online digital content.....effectively, to give them money for nothing physically tangible.....just a promise, basically. If these companies want this type of ongoing trust from consumers, then they have to maintain their promise. They have to make sure that they hold, keep, and maintain all of the digital wares you buy, and keep them accessible at all times. If a company breaks this trust, then said online store is worthless...... basically.
This is mainly why i buy physical only where possible and on the odd occasion i do by digital its only if its not a significant amount
No, it doesn't matter from person to person. It matters to the medium as a whole. See http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...
Yes, at least for the first couple of years.
For me it does, sometimes old consoles break or it gets harder to find a controller or memory card. It would be great to have a console that could play the old games too.
Also can't have many gens of consoles clogging up the entertainment centre. Looks like a mess.
For me it does. And like what MulticonsoleGamer, atleast for a couple of years it does. I mean it will be cool to play UC3 online on PS4 with others on PS3 and PS4.
Ooooh Amiga A1200 porn, that article pic should be censored. I still play Frontier: Elite 2, Settlers, Ruff n' Tumble Heimdall 2 and Cannon Fodder on my A1200 some classics never age.
I was thinking the same I loved the Amiga 1200. I still have an Amiga 32 at home love that console so amazing games.
I still have a Cd32 with SX-1 expansion which makes it an A1200 with Cd. Also have a mint A500+ Amiga Forever! Sensible Soccer!
Oh yeah! I just checked out playthroughs for Shadow of The Beast 1-3 over the weekend with some Awesome (the game) and Xenon 2 megablast clips. Speedball 2 and Captive 1-2. Elite 2... Those were the times...
The Amiga was truly amazing in it's day and I traveled down to london to pick up an Amiga 500 when it was first launched along with a copy of marble madness, Defender of the crown and Deluxe paint brilliant days great memories.
Those were the days. Sensible soccer, alien breed, super stardust, super skidmarks, cannon fodder, worms, bump n burn and many many more classic games the Amiga had.
I always wanted a CD32. I remember going to the Future Entertainment Show in the early 90's and playing Simon the Sorcerer on it, I was blown away as I hadn’t heard full clear speech in a game before. Simon was voiced by Chris Barrie.
Lol ya the good old days. I remember getting the Amiga 32 the day it came out and plugging it into my tv and was blow away by the sound and 3rd graphics on super star dust. It would of been interesting to see what Amiga would of done if they had not hit money troubles but it was an amazing time in gaming.
LOL "Funny" I was looking at that too going, "What?" Considering some of the Cos Play picks that have been up- and the inFamous (Suda 51) LpCs CosPlay article. I thought it was tame (even compared to TV)- or some God of War screen shots Far Cry 3's Scene Current AC Trailer and Screens. ... But whatev's... Personally, I like Backward Compatibility- Give you a less clutter at the TV. And a chance to play games you missed. Not to mention a back-up player for you last gen games.
It does for me. I still play PS1 games a lot on PS3.
Depends on the person. I had an 80gig phat ps3 with b/c and never used it to play ps2 games. I still own my ps2 and have 2 ps3's that need to get use somehow, someway when my ps4 comes along so that will be to play my ps3 games. On that note, however i do know some freinds that are disappointed about no b/c because they cant afford the full price to buy a new console and only care about ps4 having b/c so they can sell their ps3 to fund their ps4. So in reality they dont give a crap about ps4 having b/c because they mind keeping their ps3 its that they need to sell their ps3 to buy a ps4 and for that reason they want b/c.
We are not at all the people who should answer that imo . Time and time again we see that most users dont care and are even happy to buy yet again re release of some games . It's us the "hardcore of the hardcore" minority on consoles that does not move on . Regular folks dont even keep most games as long as we do , dont always finish their backlog , and constantly trade them in .
Why would you re-buy those? PS2 on PS3 I understand. At least the ones which got a HD version. But why would you rebuy what you already have? There won't be any benefit playing those on the PS4; nobody will make HD versions of those. If that's so important just keep the PS3. Is cheaper in the long run anyway. And who cares if people re-buy. Everybody's own busyness how to spend the money, no?
It does not to me. Im not a barn yard animal my old systems remain in good condition for multiple years after they are out of use. I don't complain about 30 second hook up. I mean why would i want to pay an extra 50-100 dollars for something i either can fix in 30 seconds by setting up a old system or for games i will abrely play if at all in the next gen. Damned if you do damned if you don't. The only games i replay anyways are old RTS games on PC or old MGS's games. I would like to play Demon soul again and dark souls again but those games require time so i would just hook up a system and play them straight thru.
It doesnt to me.. This gen sucked to me as far as quality in games.. Im glad to let it go & start fresh.. PS2 started this BC thing & it worked really well due to the number of awesome ps1 games ppl had but i rarely used it.. The 60GB PS3 phat had it & again PS2 had a lot of awesome games but i rarely used it.. Ill still keep my PS3 around while i have my PS4 but multiplats n all other stuff that releases will go on the newest console.. My PS3 will be a blu ray player for my bedroom & the games i have will just be there for nostalgic purposes.. Ill be keeping my PSN titles, Demon/Dark souls, & a few exclusives.. The rest will be sold to help offset the cost of starting a new collection of PS4 games & accessories..
Yes. End of story. Enough with the placation. Console manufacturers NEED to account for this and include this in the console. PERIOD. Nintendo seems to be the only one that understands this.
Hardly . Nintendo got it "easy" to begin with . They have been basically upgrading the same hardware and and architecture for a while now . The moment they'll switch dont expect much effort to include backward compatibility if it cost them
Like N64 to wii where is those games? Ohh you gotta but them off the virtual console hmm interesting
Yeah, and it shows. Minor upgrade for the new console. I want the platform to be able to get the max out of the given envelope available at the time. Not adding costs and holding back development because some knee jerk compromise needs to be found to play games which in reality really nobody cares about in a year or so. $400 for a new console because they had to stick to PPC and some Wii stuff - well and the controller - which is a tiny upgrade to a PS360. Nah, not what I'd expect from a next gen. Maybe it matters if you have a thin library of games (e.g. when PS3 released) but this does not seem to be the case for the PS4 launch. Easy porting might just give us a huge launch library. No excuse to say there are no games and because of that you'd need to have access to the previous generation.
Yes it matters. One of the reasons Sega lost consumer confidense was because they released add-on's and failed to support them. Microsoft and Sony just released Kinect and Move less than 2 years ago, now they are coming out with new consoles that don't let you play older games? That would be a bad marketing idea and a good way to lose consumer confidense. Jury is still out on the next Xbox, but if they could get some physical backwards compatibility, they would have a huge advantage. Also, if Microsoft taughts physical media, I think they'd have an advantage because it seems like Sony is going more and more digital, didn't even mention Blu Ray at their PS4 unveiling.
Uh ? Bluray were definitively mentioned . We even got the specs for the drive . Why should it have been something to insist upon anyway ? it's already there by default
It wasn't until after that Blu Ray was mentioned...Also, they came out and said they will have all games available day one for digital download...and "some" on disc. I'm not making it up, its become kind of obvious that Sony wants to scrap physical media, PSP GO, Gaikai and PS+ are all digital only services sort of like a Trojan Horse. I'm just saying from a consumer standpoint I'd feel better if Microsoft came out with BC with a physical media that you've bought before, and if they bring dics to the forefront.
If Sony has it and MS don't no. If Sony doesn't have it yes. If MS doesn't have it no. etc. etc. you get the idea. People just wan't something to bi**h about especially if it's Sony. Mark my words MS will announce that the nextbox is fully B/C and the entire effing WORLD will punish Sony for it. There will be no end to the doom and gloom just effing watch.
If they do,I doubt it'll be hardware base.
Sony was the pioneer of bringing it. So of course they will be the ones who sink with it since they marketed the hell out of it and it was a huge success on the PS2. The way they went about removing it on the PS3 was very questionable. In fact Jack Tretton cam,e out and said they wanted the PS3 to sell PS3 software. So that just shows you right there Sony did a complete 180 from the previous generation because they knew the system was expensive and that software sales were not doing well in the beginning. I don't have an issue with no BC on the PS4 for disc based games but I do have issues with content I buy in the store that will or will not carry over on my Playstation account.
@Insomnium I'm starting to believe that you actually enjoy playing the "Sony is the victim" card, just so you can come on N4G and b*tch about it. I've never seen someone so wrapped up and tangled in a console war like you. It is truly hilarious to watch.
Yes. It matters to me. I have a large library of great games and I want to be able to have 1 machine that runs them all instead of having multiple pieces of equipment hooked up to my TV. There are only so many HDMI inputs on my TV and right now they are all used. If I have a 720 and PS4 that is 2 used up there already. Then I have my Rogers Digital Cable box and my home theater. I have no room on my stand or on my TV to have multiple consoles hooked up and I am NOT going to keep hooking and unhooking my equipment just because I want to play a past gen game for an hour.
oh boo freakin hoo go buy a bigger tv with more hdmi inputs and a bigger stand so you can have all your consoles on one stand.
Backwards compat didn't matter so much pre digital as we all had physical copies and the machines were less connected. Now with consoles being very like PC's and with so much purchased digital content I would love it If my Xbox 720 would play Trials Evolution. I too as a hardcore older gamer would pay a premium console price for it to have extra hardware inside to emulate 360. I would then be happy If MS allowed me to transfer my digital licenses over to the new machine along with my gamer profile and Achievement gamerscore. Please MS include 360 emulation hardware. The 360 SOC used in the slim cant cost that much now. I will pay extra to have it gladly - I'm the customer and this is what I want!
It's nice to have it. But no one has an obligation to give it to you. There is no promise or contract saying that BC must be included in every system. If the company decides against it for what ever reason whether it is cost effective or simply they don't want the new console to cannibalize the old one that is understandable. It does matter just not as much as people claim it does. I have no qualms with giving up my old system for a new one. Others may still want to play their older games but can keep the older system until they are ready to buy the new one. I personally don't buy new consoles to play old games.To me that is a waste of money.If I so wanted to play older games I could just keep the old system or download them or buy a PC emulator.Like I said they have no obligation to give you BC. Show me the contract that says that because you make a new console that you have to pander to the older consoles. If you think that then show me the slots on the Wii U for SNES and N64 games.You have to download those.So how come no one complains about that? Anyone who wants it can still buy the PS3 no different then you could buy a PS2.You can disagree all you like but I will repeat they have no obligation to pander to the last console and can move on if they want. I never got angry when Nintendo dropped the N64 completely to move to the Gamecube and I spent lots of money on it. @ Gohadouken.Don't even bother. They don't understand that Nintendo's Wii and the PS3 are completely different things.They think it is the same expense and the same process to make it backwards compatible.Don't even bother to try and use logic on N4G. Leave them in their anger.
lAst i check even nintendo's compability only extend one generation . If people wanna paint Nintendo as he good folks , then why isnt the gamecube available on wii u like the wii ? Nothing prevents it . The Wii U is a jump but not the biggest one , they can't pretend to be at the forefront of power like 720/ps4 will , and they just can't forsake the wii , that's all there is to it imo
Yes their consoles have limited backward compatibility to the previous generation. But that still means that people who are upgrading to their newest console can still take the games they have in their previous consoles collection and play it on the new one. So it's beneficial to their customers at the end of the day, whichever way you want to swing it.
man i couldnt agree with you more
only early in a consoles life do I feel it's important, after a system is on the market for around 2 years it will usually have a decent library of it's own. So during those early days B/C is great while you wait for the new consoles library to build up. PS3 without early B/C would have been disastrous because it seemed like forever for the library of games to get flowing. I played more PS2 games in the first 18 months of owning my PS3 than I played PS3 games just because there wasn't alot of the types of games I liked.
we all own current gen consoles. why would you need 2 machines that play the same disc? just raises the price doesn't it?
Not everyone has endless space for multiple consoles. currently I have the following hooked up to my TV to game on. 1 - PS3 1 - 360 1- PC 1 - laptop 1 - cable box So please tell me where I should squeeze in one more piece of hardware? I don't live in a mansion and space is limited that is why B/C is a nice thing to have and it also keeps the manufacturer getting more possible sales on the older platform too. Where as if they had to choose 1 or the other they could lose out on some sales. edit = don't game on the cablebox but it's there taking up space
Move some stuff around. Your telling me you cant fit one more bit of hardware anywhere? Buy a new entertainment unit. Move your laptop to your lap. Do you really need a PC and laptop connected to your tv What if you buy surround sound. Where will you keep the player And the reason they don't have B/C is because you will be getting two for the price of one. The ps3 sales will go down. Its not like Sony want to get rid of the ps3. It will b here for a few more years yet so why damage the sales. Eventually everyone will upgrade to next gen so they r squeezing the most out of the current gen
I've got over 100 PS3 games bought I would like to replay while PS4's catalog rises and I don't want to keep the PS3 for space reasons...so to me it really matters. Another thing I would like to say is I don't like the digital distribution system. Look, every digital copy I've bought won't be playable in PS4, so cloud systems got their downfall.
Depends. Yes it matters and is appreciated but isn't needed, it's just that extra cool bonus. We went from SNES to N64 with no backwards compatibility and same from N64 to GC.....The PS systems did the same until recently.
Nah, reality is, I'm getting a PS4 to play PS4 games. Keeping my PS3 to play those. Keep the cost low and don't pollute the new just because things need to be compatible. Glad a console isn't restricted by that. Really no point in having BC - sounds convenient; but I wouldn't want to trade the disadvantage which is carrying legacy stuff to the next generations. Lean and mean in a new machine, that's what I want. Weird that you'd pay 200 extra to have this in the new machine, while you could simply keep what you have and safe those (if you are lucky, you'll get those 200 selling the PS3 - which I doubt). Sure living room clutter is a disadvantage.
I used to think it mattered, but in hindsight, I virtually NEVER used it and despite owning many favorites as PS2 titles, I ended up purchasing the HD remakes for the PS3. I literally never played Xbox games on my 360 or PS2 games on my PS3. For people that may not have gone through that before (or simply have different gaming habits than myself) I could see them feeling differently, but for me... it's a non-factor. My existing consoles will keep working after I bring a new one into the house...
Only for people that hang onto their old games. I play and sell so doesn't matter to me.
Just keep your old console. For those of you saying you would pay more for new console to have BC because your current console might break if thats the case just go buy a new ps3 slim, I do not see the issue
There is a lot of advantages to be have if a new system has backwards compatibility. Keeping a customer to one ecosystem is the key priority and you will be hard press to do that, if your newer system cannot play the previous generation games. Not everyone loves to keep their older consoles.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.