Does PS4 Need Backwards Compatibility?

Backwards compatibility has been announced for the Xbox One but what does that mean for the PS4's future with no backwards compatibility on the horizon?

The story is too old to be commented.
yarbie10001272d ago

It doesn't need it. But is it nice to have?

JoGam1272d ago (Edited 1272d ago )

Exactly. Let me be honest I had the first PS3. Its was $600. I never used the backwards compatible feature at all and i had tons of ps2 games. Its a great feature that is rarely used. I dont even think i'll rent a game from PSNow.

Genuine-User1272d ago

It's a feature not many will use. And emulating the cell processor must be a nightmare.

SniperControl1271d ago

Sony need to incorporate a price with-in the PS+ sub, say an extra £10 - £15 a month to have full access to the service, if you dont want PS now, just sign up to the normal PS+ sub

I'am currently on the UK beta for PS Now and have refused to buy any games, prices are just damn high, hopefully the other gamers on the beta do the same, that way Sony will get that we don't want to pay those prices.

Why o why1271d ago

would love it but can do without it. Would love to replay Ni no Kuni again

uth111271d ago

If you own a game on the PS3, they should give you a big discount if you want to play that game through PS Now.

4Sh0w1271d ago

My thoughts again are I think Microsoft knocked it out of the park with BC but I dont think we should beat Sony up over not having it on ps4= it was never promised.

I got NO problem with Sony saying "hey BC on ps4 is impossible or extremely too difficult/expensive because ps3 and ps4 hardware are totally different, so psnow is all we will be offering"= Thats fine, I only hate the double talking, downplaying, and then saying stuff like EA Access isnt worthwhile but psnow is.

I dont think ps4 needs BC, its sold record numbers so far without it, that said I think BC is important to a large segment of gamers.

Death1271d ago

Both the 360 and PS3 use PowerPC based processors. The Xbox One and PS4 use x86 based APU's. It's not the hardware preventing Sony from enabling b/c, it's the fact they would rather charge people to play older games thru PSNow. PS4 demand is high and Sony doesn't need to do anything for their customers. Microsoft is seeing much less demand and has to work at increasing sales. This is why we see so much on the Xbox One and relatively less on PS4 as far as features go.

kayoss1271d ago

I agree. I have never used my PS3 backward compatibility. Its nice to have and very conveinent but lots of people are too busy playing new games to be playing old games.

UKmilitia1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

i thought i wanted backwards compatable fetaure,but i have been in the ps now beta for a few months and have tried a game for a few minutes and then thats it.
its nice ot have i suppose but if it takes away budget for future things then i would rather be without it and them focus on something better.

PSNOW is a big waste of money imo and 2 days ago i noticed the rentals in beta went from free o £4.99 for 3 days rental.
screw that and i deleted it instantly.

MS giving it for free if you have disc and your digital bought games downloadable is a brilliant move which i applaud and its a big up yours to psnow(which with new pricing Sony deserve imo).

i think if they monitored the amount of use the service has i cant see it worth the money they invested.
people need to move on now and im so hyped for games coming out in next 6 months i aint looking back for anything.




dcbronco1271d ago

If so many playstation fans think BC is so unimportant did Sony make a mistake buying Gaikai? Is this the last Playstation console? You have to assume Sony spent that huge amount of money for something. If fans don't care about old games Playstation Now will never be able to price the service reasonable enough to attract a large user base.

If you plan to run it as it originally was and stream full games does that eliminate the need for a next Playstation. If not, and you make another Playstation, do you have to make a two tier solution with a arcade and streaming only version. But that would undercut the full version and the R&D resources you can throw at it.

Do you turn Gaikai into a cloud compute system to extend the life of PS4 or supplement PS5 as a cheaper streaming/cloud system. What am I talking about? Playstation fans don't believe in magic.

BC was Microsoft's"this is how you share games with your friends on PlayStation" moment. Though the Family Share plan was far better than handing games to someone next to you. I could hand a game to my "cousin" a thousand miles away. But the real question isn't whether Playstation needs BC. It's whether Sony still needs Gaikai.

Cloud compute will advance far faster than game streaming. Here's why. Business. Right now companies spend billions trying to keep up their internal infrastructure and keeping it current. It is cheaper to offload computing needs to the cloud only when needed as opposed to having personnel maintaining equipment that often is more than needed. Microsoft,Google, Apple and Amazon are all fighting for 100's of billions in potential revenue. Other companies too.

Sony and OnLive are fighting for a few hundred million potential. Compute will have tens of billions in r&d spent on it. Sony and OnLive will spend less than 100 million and that is probably generous. And though streaming games will piggyback on compute advancements, it is only useful to a small part of the population and will quickly become obsolete. Except for movies and music.

_-EDMIX-_1271d ago

Agreed. Its nice to have, but its not a deal breaker. Simply keep your past systems or just buy on used.

PS Now doesn't give you ALL games released, you need to always have an internet connection. Even MS BC is limited to who will support it. Only real way of playing all your favorites is pretty simple, keep your old systems or buy one used. Whats sad, is its clearly the most obvious answer that gets a solution to the problem pretty fast vs lets wait to see whats added on PS Now or lets wait to see what publishers if ever ok certain titles.

....just buy it used and be done with it lol. I'm pretty sure folks who bought PS4's and XONE's wanted PS4 and XONE for PS4 and XONE games.

@DCbrounco- "If so many playstation fans think BC is so unimportant did Sony make a mistake buying Gaikai?"

Not really..PS Now is not a solution to BC and has nothing to do with BC, you don't put in your PS games and PS Now just start running lol.

PS Now works on PS3 too along with other devices....what does that have to do with PS4 BC?

Army_of_Darkness1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

Not gonna lie, but I'm too accustomed too playing Remastered ps3 games @1080p/ 60pfs on my ps4 only now.
As for the non remastered ps3 games, well I still play them on my ps3 console so psnow or backwards compat. doesn't concern or interest me.
My ps3 is also backwards compatib. and I used it only twice.
Current Gen games FTW :-)

dcbronco1270d ago

Edmix if it's not about BC what is it about. You can still buy a ps2 or 3. Though Sony fans seem to have moved on. If it's about playing on other devices, it looks like Microsoft is doing that for free too with universal apps. Sony fans don't believe in cloud compute. It looks like Gaikai was just a bad acquisition right now. Unless they go cloud compute with it Microsoft undercuts the value of any planned service with offering the same thing for free.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1270d ago
d_g1272d ago

yeah it would be very nice

there will be no 60$ remasters

Letthewookiewin1271d ago

I can't wait to play the Uncharted collection in 1080p 60Fps. Also I love my Master Cheif collection that was remastered and updated to 1080p 60fps it's a much better experience that offered a new visual experience for old games. I only buy the remasters that mean something to me. Speaking with your wallet is important.

4Sh0w1271d ago

Letthewookiewin, I totally agree.

UKmilitia1271d ago

i would rather have remasters of epic games than backwards compat as long as they have extra stuff in unless backwards compat could upscale etc(which it cant)

last of us awesome value
metro was awesome value
uncharted is awesome value
gears and halo look awesome value

god of war isnt that good value although i cant wait to play it,it should have more content imo.

Pogmathoin1271d ago

The fact is, only the biggest will get remasters, so the option to be able to carry on playing the rest on one system is a win win for gamers. How people can percieve a negative is beyond me. If MS has the resources to do it, what is the problem? BC knocked it out of the park, and killed PsNow as it is right now.... again, great having competition..... it always benefits consumers..... PSN forced MS into games with gold..... win all round for everyone.... just enjoy the golden age of gaming, stick together and support the industry, not make it look juvenile...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1271d ago
badboyz091271d ago

For Major Exclusives & Call Of Duty.

Bigpappy1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

It is not needed. PS fans are happy to pay for games they already bought. They understand Sony is never going to let them do play the old games because like with EA access, it has no value (to Sony). So PSnow is a lot better option on that system than Backwards compatibility.

Tony-A1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

Nice stealth troll, bro.

PS Now isn't a better option for PS4 owners like myself. Technology like this is obviously possible on the system since PS3 emulation is happening right now with PS Now. Hell, you can even see the XMB from there. The fact that this isn't a big thought in Sony's mind right now gets me really angry

But with that said, it's also completely useless to me now. To get into the next generation, I - along with many others - have already sold my previous generation hardware and software. Backwards compatibility at this point only serves those who were financially prepared to buy an 8th generation system without giving up their 7th Gen gear.

In that regard, since I no longer own a PS3 and 360 or its games, PS Now becomes a better option. Paying $45 every 3 months to play games I used to own sucks, but it's a more convenient option considering it's all right there for me. I can also try out games I've never owned before for no added cost, which is nice.

It's like movies. I could just get a Blu-Ray player that also play DVDs so my older catalog is still relevant..... but then there's netflix.

Makes sense?

Death1271d ago


Paying to rent the games you owned after selling them for pennies on the dollar doesn't make much cents.

ger23961271d ago

I think your missing the point of ps now. It's targeted towards people who now have access to ps now via any streaming device that's not a console. For gamers like myself, ps now is not a necessity nor b/c on ps4. The majority of gamers hold on to their last gen console, therefore eliminating any need for b/c. Ps now along with b/c on the Xbox 1, is a nice option for those who choose to use it.

Tony-A1271d ago


It does when you have no other option, which is my point. I just said it sucks, but if I had enough of an incentive to pay the equivalent of 3.5 games a year on a service that can give me PS3 and eventually PS2/PS1 games on almost any platform that's capable, it works itself out.

We're talking about a feature that is far from a system seller. It's a novelty that serves as an added bonus and lessens the blow of having to dump 10 years of investment into something new.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1271d ago
Letthewookiewin1271d ago

I really don't care to have BC. I barely have time to play all the new games that come out.

Tyre1271d ago

For an insignificant feature Sony puts a lot of effort in providing us with the Sony back-catalog: PS1 games on PS/PS2 store...PS1 BC on PS2/PS3 and they removed PS2 hardware BC(because of expenditure), but later added PS2 Backwards Compatibility via emulation in a PS store purchase. Sony cares a lot about their BC, so much that they offer it now via PSnow, they CAN make an emulator also with recompiling to x86 (commercial purpose)(Cell is a PowerPC just like the Xbox360 CPU)..the PS3 differs as much from the x86 architecture (XB1 & PS4) as the Xbox360. They could also offer us a disc-based entry to PSnow, if you have the retail disc or bought the PS3 digital version, previous purchase gives you entry-right, stream that game without a fee. That would be the same as the MS offering BC for already purchased games. Why not? People who didn't buy it before will have to purchase(commercial value), but for Playstation gamers it will be a service. I think it's wonderful that MS has done this, besides the difference between PS2 and PS3 games/XBoriginal and XB360 is that we now have Trophies/Achievements and it is mighty cool that the validity of those Throphies/Achievements remain intact, we will always be able to get that special Throphies/Achievement via BC, it makes a huge difference. BC is also a given on PC. I'm still able to play that game from '96 for example. It keeps the value of your purchase in check...less like junk food more like culture/art/ disposable (surplus value).

medman1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

I get how people want backward compatibility, but I don't know many people who actually use it. Personally, I want new great games and experiences to play, not to go back and re-play games I've already played multiple times.

I still own a 360 and ps3, with a large library of games for both of them, and the only games I have returned to play in the last two years is the Uncharted trilogy. That's not suggesting in future years I won't replay the original Gears, or Mass Effect, or Bioshock, for example. But I've played hundreds of hours with those games already, and the more time that goes by, the more I want those games to live as the masterpieces they were in my memory. Going back to them and playing them will only show the flaws, the clunky mechanics, the old gamepad inadequecies, the now by comparison unimpressive visuals, etc. etc. etc. In fact, I have a rather sizable backlog of new current gen games to work through, much less looking backwards.

Death1271d ago

"Going back to them and playing them will only show the flaws, the clunky mechanics, the old gamepad inadequecies, the now by comparison unimpressive visuals, etc. etc. etc"

That applies to most indie games and look at how well they do.

It's funny how so many say they would rather have new games than have the ability to play the games they already bought. I was under the impression you could have both. Sony offers both, but you have to pay to play the games you already own on your new console. Microsoft is allowing it for free.

How is this optional feature even debated? If you don't want it you don't have to use it. If you would like to play Xbox 360 games on your Xbox One with your Xbox 360 friends or Xbox One friends you can.

MysticStrummer1271d ago

"I don't know many people who actually use it"

Yup. When I heard PS2 was backwards compatible I thought it was a great idea… and never used it. None of my friends did either, to my knowledge.

When I heard PS3 was backwards compatible I thought it was a great idea… and never used it. None of my friends did either, to my knowledge.

I have no interest in PS Now unless it offers PS4 games. For me and those I personally know, no, PS4 doesn't need BC.

Lon3wolf1271d ago

Yep agreed, never needed always nice I was going to put :D

someOnecalled1271d ago

i hope ps5 dont have BC. PS fans dont need or want it

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1270d ago
Sharingan_no_Kakashi1272d ago (Edited 1272d ago )

People always talk about it but few ever really use it. I'd rather a console manufacturer focus on new experiences. I rarely play through games more than once anyway. Unless you know it's a new ps3 exclusive game coming out and i want to play it on my ps4 that's the only way I could see myself wanting BC. Like the Kingdom Hearts HD collection. But that rarely happens.

Death1271d ago

I would rather have the manufacturer focus on new games and experiences and allow me to play my existing library on my new console. Why do you feel the need to choose when you already have both?

Sony didn't focus on new games first. They pretty much focused on PSNow and other subscription services while relying on third parties for content. You would have a point if Sony were tearing it up with new first party developed games while Microsoft dropped development.

Lon3wolf1271d ago

I would play Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey in a heartbeat on my One, not sure of the chances of those titles getting BC treatment due to the number of discs each of those has.

Summons751272d ago

Now it does or at minimum free usage of PSnow IF you have the game disc.

MasterCornholio1272d ago

I don't feel that it needs it because it isn't a system selling feature. However it's still nice to have but in the PS4s case it would be extremely difficult to incorporate given the major differences between the PS4 and the PS3.

The holidays will prove me right like always.

Davi1231271d ago

If Sony decides implement BC in PS4, i hope isn't like MS! If Sony don't want to take the risk of putting emulators on PS4, because of piracy. I hope they do at least a service like Share Play that give to us the opportunity to play all CDs (PS1), all DVDs (PS2) and all Blu-ray's (PS3)!

Malacath1271d ago

Why not MS method of backwards compatibility?

The emulation is excellent. Some games perform better on the x1 than they did on the 360.

I would much rather emulation than ps now.

Also whats having an emulator on the console got to do with piracy?

Davi1231270d ago

MS not will put on the XBone a emulator of XB360, is because of this that you can't play all, just 18 games now. And i didn't speak about PS Now. What i said is: i liked that Sony do something like Share Play, a service that allows you to use play all the discs (PS1/2/3) in PS4!

Death1271d ago

Aren't the Holidays the time we see more games released on the Xbox One and increased sales too? What exactly do the Holidays prove you right about? The existence of Santa?

The PS3 and Xbox 360 were both PowerPC or RISC based systems while the PS4 and Xbox One are both x86 based. Other than the fact you are confused by Sony's BS marketing campaign for the "Cell", why do you believe there is a bigger difference?

ff71001272d ago

It's something that would be great feature to have but, its not a neccessary thing to do, besides emulating CELL would be close to impossible either way.

Death1271d ago

CELL is a modified PowerPC processor. Microsoft's "XENON" processor found in the Xbox 360 is also a modified PowerPC based processor. Microsoft found a way to emulate their PowerPC based game console on the Xbox One. The PS4 which is "superior" could surely do the same thing, couldn't it? The only reason they don't is because they would rather charge for it with PSNow. It's the same value equation that keeps you from being intelligent enough to decide if EA Access is a good deal.

Chevalier1271d ago

" The PS4 which is "superior" could surely do the same thing, couldn't it? "

Shouldn't you know better than the software engineers? Seems that's the whole point of your Xenon PowerPC comparison? Your doing such a good job as an armchair developer maybe you can explain how easy it is to do? Please add some more tech detail too.

Death1271d ago

I don't need to be an engineer to see that it can be done. I downloaded the update and started using it a couple days ago. Sony's modified PowerPC chip was marketed as "The Cell". That doesn't change what it is. Both Xbox 360's Xenon and PS3's Cell are based on PowerPC architecture. Both Xbox One and PS4's architecture is based on x86 architecture.

You want tech detail? Many preview members are playing their old PowerPC based games on their new x86 based systems right now as we speak. You can talk about how impossible it is all you want, but Microsoft did it while Sony states they are content offering streaming for a fee.

I'm not sure I'm any more comfortable saying Sony isn't smart enough to figure it out as I am saying they are too greedy to do it. What I do know though is Microsoft did it and they did it for free based on feedback from the community.

Chevalier1271d ago (Edited 1271d ago )

Thanks for proving my point. The point is your NOT an engineer so stop pretending that everything is so easy. If it's so easy then why did it take MS a software company till now to announce this? Shouldn't 'easy' X86 architecture make this announcement 1 1/2 years too late?! If it was easy this should have been available at launch, not a year and 1/2 later announcement.

If it's so easy then why does that page you listed only shows like 20 titles. Since it's easy as press of a button for you considering your vast amounts of knowledge then how come ALL titles aren't already available? Shouldn't it have been just put on the software and presto go play ALL your games?! No? Yeah I thought so. Thanks for being a wonderful and knowledgable software 'engineer' and enlightening us all.