Nintendo and Sony are chasing the “Classic” consoles money, but ignoring a far more important issue on hand.
"Sony, Nintendo, Classic Consoles are Fine—But What About Backwards Compatibility?" this isn't backwards compatibility, so... what about it?
I know these classic consoles isare novelty ites but Its about Sony gets called out for not having PS3 BC yet the Switch does not get called out for the lack thereof by tge Nintendo fans in the gaming media. Bad Moon Rising indeed.
I swear I just read the headline “Sony, Nintendo, Classic Consoles are Fine—But What About Backwards Compatibility?” It states right there in the headline. So how is Nintendo not being called out?
Yes they have dude. We've been begging for VC for the last year.
Interesting point. N4G has a rule that you aren't supposed to make off topic posts. Why can't they hold the articles posted here to the same standards. Maybe we can give Gamingbolt a 2 week restriction for making an off topic article, or restrict them for two weeks for constantly inciting console stupidity....which apparently is a new thing to restrict people over as well. how about it mods? If I get a restriction for this comment, so be it, at least I know at least one of the mods will have read it. But to keep it on topic, Yeah, the mini consoles are fine. And as far as I know, BC is still not available on the PS4, so nothing to really discuss about it, and I don't see why an article about the mini console should be a springboard for a topic that hasn't chaged in a couple years now. Coolbeans did a blog about Cross play which basically said that it's stupid to keep regurgitating the same argument over and over again when there is nothing new to add, and even stupider to make spurious allegories to try and make what is more commonly known as a strawman argument.
But Nintendo had BC on their previous 2 systems. The 3DS plays DS games. The Switch was different because of the format of the system.
No, the Switch is different because Nintendo is dumb.
no, cartridges vs discs.
It should at least have BC for digital titles. It would be unrealistic to expect backwards compatibility for physical titles due to the media difference.
It's also unrealistic to expect it on digital titles because the Switch's architecture is totally different from the Wii U's.
Sony had BC on it's past 3 consoles. PS2, PS3(partially removed in later releases), and Vita. VIta had a different format as well, so physical BC wasn't possible, but it had digital BC. The PS4 didn't have PS3 BC because it was a different format than its predecessor, and realistically, it had different architecture than the PS1/2 as well. Since it didn't include the hardware, it couldn't have BC. Point of note also, MS doesn't have BC. It has emulation, which isn't technically BC. It's a good BC solution considering the circumstances of the hardware situation. I don't really see the point of this article other than to incite the console wars, but if you're going to point out a defense for Nintendo, at least give Sony the same credit for meeting the same criteria that you set up, and then we can all just agree that this article is really just more dumb content from Gamingbolt.
Wii let you put in Gamecube discs, Wii U let you put in Wii discs. 3DS allows you to play DS games. The PS4 does nothing, only the beginning model PS3's had BC and Sony quickly removed it. We are talking about physical BC here, not digital. Only the PS2 played PS1 games natively across the board. So not sure why you are even bringing it up. Sure, digitally you can play games BC, but we aren't talking about that. I don't know why you got defensive because I chose to focus on Nintendo there. Nintendo literally support BC. The Switch used a whole different format than the Wii U, so BC would have been next to impossible.
Except ps3 was bc with ps1 physical and digital games throughout it's lifetime, in every iteration. I wasn't aware we were just speaking of physical bc, but that seems rather limiting because digital is a thing. Sony removed it due to them bleeding money from the system. They tried to keep ps2 bc through emulation much.like ms does now, but they stopped because they saw the feature wasn't in demand enough, and I assume they were running into issues with the difference in hardware. The ps3 played ps1 games natively as well. The processor was included I the controller chip, and the bios code existed on a flash ROM
Nintendo and Sony are chasing the “Classic” consoles money, but ignoring a far more important issue on hand.“ Nintendo and Sony are hard at work making great new games to play.
Yep great companies can manage more than one product or game at a time. Others can’t manage one console or a decent game across an entire generation. I know where I’m gaming for the next year or 3 switch and PS4 gaming gold plethora of top quality games and more than enough to keep me busy. Not a fan of same type yearly churns if a game is that good it doesn’t need a sequel within a year.
Not gonna lie, when I had an Xbox One, it was pretty cool to buy Fable Anniversary/Halo Reach, put it in the system and the game just worked. I probably could put it an original Halo:CE and it probably would work on the system. The backwards compatibility on the systems is a nice touch for people who want to keep their physical library but reduce the amount of consoles. I would love to put my copies of Legend of Dragoon and SOCOM 2 in my PS4 and just have it start up.
Yeah, being able to unplug my fat 2008 360 and its unholy brick of power was a very liberating moment. If microsoft makes lost planet 2 backwards compatible that’ll be pretty much every game i wanted.
“As digital libraries and ecosystems become more and more important going forward, something that Sony and Nintendo are both acutely aware of, maintaining continuity and compatibility like Microsoft does will become ever more important.” Can’t deny that.
you had a chance for near perfect BC, you didn't like the $600 price that came with it. i doubt MS is profiting from their XBox BC, i would hazard a guess that's the reason why they didn't have resources for new games and had to buy new studios... and now that remasters have proven popular and profitable. that ship has sailed...
Backwards compatibility had nothing to do with their lack of gaming studios.
Does it matter whether MS profits from BC or not? It’s a cool feature, and gamers are the ones who benefit. Isn’t that what matters more?
Nah it's 4theplayers or some bullshit that matters... oh wait.
You contradicted yourself..."they didn't have resources for new games and had to buy new studios". If they had the resources to buy studios, then they had money for new games.
I would wager that they're profitting quite well off BC. They get 20% of the sale of all digital purchases, and while some people do indeed have their physical copies of games, far more are likely buying those games digitally to play them. If they didn't, then the publishers would really have no incentive to allow their games to be added to the BC catalog, but allowing BC for physical games is the condition to open up that potential revenue stream on the X1 through Xbox store. Its one reason why I kind of laugh at people who say that Sony blocking BC is due to greed, because they could actually make a lot of money doing the same thing that MS does. Sure, Sony makes some money off those PS2 classics with trophy support, but imagine the overall sales they lose with PS1/2 games that people buy up for nostalgia, or through flash sales because they're cheap. Something that far outweighs whatever they're likely making through PSNow, or a remaster every year or two.....because PSNow will still be brought, and those remasters will still sell just like they did last gen when there was BC digital purchases available.
What about it? Last time those consoles had bc, people acted like they couldn't care less. Nice feature thats been around for years, but now all of a sudden, it's essential to have.
It's a really nice feature to have at the beginning of a generation when there isn't much of a game selection. But at this stage of a generation it's pretty pointless. I barely have time for all the new games I'm interested in, I'm not going to go back and play something from last gen again.
Yeah, Xbox does BC better. It has for over three years now. "But what about backwards compatibility?" Yeah....what about it? Consumers have made it clear that they are not going to buy brand new consoles to play games from previous generations. For three years BC has been there and still Xbox One fights to be relevant. Hell, NES Classic has made more of an impact with consumers than BC on Xbox One ever has. So what about it?
Wow, you're pretty much the emperor of fact-less assumptions. I bought a PS2 in order to play DVDs and PS1 games. I bought a Raspberry Pi in order to play 8-bit and 16-bit games. I mainly game on PC because it can play almost every PC game ever released, which means my previous-gen purchases aren't completely wasted once the next gen rolls around. I can only presume there are a LOT of people out there like me.
And you are the emperor of anecdotal evidence, which is entirely worthless. Are you really going to pretend that since BC was announced three years ago there has been this massive surge in demand for Xbox One? Seriously?
Judging by the way bc was dumped by Sony on PS3 and has done jack for xbone it seems your presumption is wrong.
That's good for you. Despite being someone who actually does like the feature, and would appreciate it on any console it's offered on, empirical evidence suggests that it really isn't that much in demand. There are strong enough reports on how many systems have sold between the big three that suggest that BC is really not that important to people, and if anything, the one system that actually offers it seems to have declining sales YOY, with the last surge being a new hardware release last year. When PS2 came out, I didn't buy it to play my PS1 games. But when it was announced that it would play them, I was really impressed and happy about it, and did play my PS1 games on it, until I played mostly PS2 games on it. It wasn't until the PS3 that I started back into retro gaming in a big way, but as I did, my desire for BC waned into becoming a nice feature to have(Launch 60GB PS3 for PS1-3 games), but ultiamtely not something I was too fussed about either way. So, its not a matter of if there are a lot of people out there like you, but rather, the percentage of people out there like you, and whether or not that percentage is enough to warrant the companies worrying about it so much from a business perspective. I'd say the numbers suggest that it's something it'd be cool if they offered, but won't really affect them one way or another. It will affect those like you who want or need the feature however, and that is something that would be worth considering from these companies. Case in point, one of the few things that I feel MS has done right with the X1 is the offering of BC, and it's been a good thing for establishing postitive feelings towards their brand. That's something all companies should want. As it stands though, the other two companies are approaching that in different ways, and it's pretty apparent that Sony is doing fine when it comes to actual consumer happiness, because apparent lack of cross play and BC is pretty marginal in the face of the support they're given the system otherwise.
You people are ridiculous. You're using the XBone as an example, which is inherently flawed because there are pretty much no good XBox games to play. Of course it isn't a feature that's going to sell units of a failed system. There are, however, probably millions of people around the world who would appreciate the ability to play PS1&2 games on their PS4s. YOU are the vocal minority. Normal people want more features, not less.
Well you say that BC is not impactful...Cod MW2 has got to the best sellers list at 8th for August and that's nearly a decade old game. https://mp1st.com/news/call... BC is exposing games and leading people to by them. Ms can monitor which games get tractions and may create games to cater to those people. Xbox is creating and eco system of games from all generation of Xbox. If you think you'll buy new consoles to only play new games then your wrong. Everyone has a backlog and when the new gen of Xbox starts you can still expect to migrate those game to the new console without feeling the pressure of ticking off game from your backlog. Most importantly, gamers enjoy collecting games and having BC helps ease that transition to a new console without feeling like those games are being segregated and making them feel dated. Many publishers out there have exploited gamers by having shoddy remasters like the silent hill HD collection. Psnow's PS2 and non existent PS1 library are quite poor considering and the remastersare to be blamed for that. Xbox is able to give us gems like Lost Odyssey and blue dragon as BC and it's refreshing to see it playable on new gen system if you owned the game.
This isn't the first time a game has been added to BC for X1 and made it on the monthly list. Think it happened with another Call of Duty game last year. These two instances of games appearing on a monthly best sellers list is not significant. BC isn't "leading" people to buy Xbox One. That is the point. "when the new gen of Xbox starts you can still expect to migrate those game to the new console" I expect PS5 to be able to play PS4 games at launch as well. PS5 will be AMD just like PS4. There will be no shift to brand new architectures that prevented BOTH Xbox One and PS4 from having BC at launch last gen. And having that at launch is when it is most impactful, not three years later.
Maybe cod is a better seller cause theirs nothing else to play on Xbone?
What would be even more refreshing would be some great new ip's from the xbox camp lol..
Until Sony starts putting all classic games in HD with BC I could care less.
Meaning you DO care. :P
You mean you could NOT care less
Could care less/couldn't care less however you see fit.
You could care less? Why dont you?
I stated in my original comment why.
Yep. They all gotta' step up their game and allow us to play old games. At least let us buy their old games. And in the case of old games that we have previously purchased digitally, we should either be given free access to those games(as we would on PC), or at the very least be given heavy discounts. I was very disappointed to find that when Nintendo announced that Mario Kart 8 was announced for Nintendo Switch it wasn't given a discount to those of us who purchased the game digitally.
BC isn't going to happen unless through the legal sifter of IP owners. Thanks Gamestop...
PS3 had BC, people whine and bitch about how expensive it was. Majority of the PS3 owners didn’t even care about it. Sony of course cut where they thought was not useful on the PS3 and that was BC. All sudden everyone cries about lack of BC.
It only cost Sony $27 to produce the PS2 chip inside the PS3. It cost Sony around $800 to produce the PS3. The PS2 chip was hardly the reason why the PS3 was so expensive. BTW Sony had working PS2 and PS1 emulators last gen and they could easily add them in an update and offer BC through software emulation. Your argument is weak. EDIT oh and crying for BC is better than crying for not having it. At least with BC our purchases would have more value. What's the reason for you to not wanting BC?
Point still stands, Sony cut BC from PS3 and it didn't harm them at all. Sony had no BC this gen and it didn't harm them at all. Most people DO NOT care about BC.
Only $27, with how many millions of systems sold? They'd have to get the licensing costs of 2-3 games per system sold to make up that only $27. There wasn't a whole lot that Sony could cut from the system and keep it functional as an actual PS3, so they cut what they could. The USB and data ports probably cost them less than a few dollars to include, but when you compound that cost over millions of systems, it adds up. They were still losing money on the non-BC versions for a while, but they were trying to reduce the bleeding, until they could actually profit from the system. The PS1 emulator stayed in the PS3, and the Vita for that matter. but it ran off the actual PS1 processor and Bios code, which wasn't removed from the system, as it was part of the embedded controller. The PS2 emulator didn't work for all games, and as an emulator, it required the same approval that the Xbox now requires, which is why not many games were released on it. Could the current emulators be added to the PS4? Sure. I'm sure the PS1 emulator would work fine. The PS2 emulator though, it's only pure conjecture on how well it runs, and there is no indication the level of support that Sony has put into it for creating it, maintaining it, or supporting it for a BC solution. Doing it like MS did, with digital downloads approved by the publishers seems like a good idea, until you realize that there just aren't that many digital PS2 titles available on the store like MS had with 360 games. I'm all for having BC. I'm not crying for not having it....just pointing out that people are making arguments that seem to be aimed at trying to paint Sony in a bad light, as opposed to them seeming to genuinely want the feature. It's become a defensive stance among the community, fostered by the console war that constantly happens by using arguments like yours which only paint one part of the actual picture.
rainslacker Doesn't change anything of what I said. If people bitched about the PS3 price, it certainly wasn't due to the PS2 chip inside it. People want to pretend that the PS3 was so expensive due to the PS2 chip but it wasn't. You and I both know that it was due to that failure called the cell and a blu ray drive that was not needed last gen as evidenced by the 360 and its DVD9 drive. Licenses? Why? Did the licenses from the games bought from their network already expired?
BC adds value to any console so I don't understand why people argue against it.
I think it's more people arguing that they don't need it rather than arguing against the concept. I have a PS2/3/and 4.. If I need to play older games, I have the equipment available.
If they don't need then they don't care. If they don't care why are they arguing against it? BTW this is a rethoric question. I know very well why they're arguing against it.
I feel like they argue against it because Sony doesn’t implement it yet. Wait till Sony does it and you’ll see.
Yes, this exactly.
@imalwaysright Again, I think they are arguing they don't need it. That's not the same as arguing against it. That's like saying if i'm not for Xbox, i'm against Xbox.... Which we all know why that logic doesn't work.
@king I think when Sony does, it won't be the people that own ps4's that will be making the most noise about having bc on playstation, I think it will mostly be people that DON'T own playstation's that will be the loudest about bc. Kind of like it is now. People are acting like the PlayStation NEEDS bc, or there will be a riot. Meanwhile, most ps4 owners don't seem to be affected by the lack of bc. It's a nice feature to have, but let's stop pretending that the lack of bc on ps4 does't mostly come from the media, and people that don't really game on ps4.
@Iam If the people that didn't care didn't argue, then these articles wouldn't ever reach any kind of response, and those that say they want it wouldn't get any notice, and these articles wouldn't be written anymore. It's nice to think that those that shouldn't care should just ignore the issue, but if someone really does care, then you really need those who want to disagree with you to argue with you so you actually have a reason to continue harping on the issue and making your point over and over again for years when it's readily apparent that the company in question isn't going to do it because people say that they want it on some forums. For all the pitfalls of arguing on forums, one thing holds more true today than ever. It's the arguing which causes controversy and makes mountains out of molehills. Face it, if we actually took the number of people who cared about this topic, and had them make one comment each into a empty void of people who only agree, there would only be the same 10-20 people commenting on this issue, to the same people over and over again, and these topics would never reach the top of the lists. That's how it is today, and that's how it is in every article. It's all become so redundant, that it's those that don't care that actually make it a topic still worth having....or at least make it worth it to these websites to keep bringing the topic up. Also, its wrong to assume that because people argue against you on the necessity of the feature, that they are against the feature. There is more than one level to the argument or concept being presented. Quite frankly, I haven't seen very many people say they would not want the feature, only that they may not care about it, or they were indifferent to whether it was there or not.
@ rai Please don't give me that bullshit. The reason why people defend it because as you said in your comment above: "just pointing out that people are making arguments that seem to be aimed at trying to paint Sony in a bad light". The question you need to ask yourself is why this subject makes you and others think that people are painting Sony in a bad light just because they want BC. Is it because you think that Sony not offering BC is a dick move from them? I don't know, just asking. I can only speak for myself. I'm a consumer so obviously I will always argue in favor of having BC. I can't think of any reason why I shouldn't. I really can't.
Not a single Sony fan would be upset if it came. The point is these articles that act like X1 is the greatest because of BC are just plainly stupid. Microsoft has no new games, but you brag about them supporting old games? Really?
There probably paid off by microsoft to boost sales since they finish last every month and get dominated by the other 2 companies.
Know one is against it, it's just that most people care more about moving forward
We're not arguing against it, we're saying its not as essential as the fanatx are making it to be. Its basically microsofts way of compensating for the lack of new ip's on xbone. Its funny how the only people who seem to care don't own PS4's and never will.
They dont need it..There both dominating xbox in sales every month so obviously its not an issue.
What about it?
Nobody cared about backwards compatibility on the Wii, let alone the Wii U. And those consoles where compatible with all games of their previous generation since day one. Backwards compatibility is a nice thing to have, but it doesn't make or break a console at all.
What about it? No one seemed to care about BC writing article after article when Sony offered it so what changed? Oh right MS is now offering it and Sony isn't. What about the last three generation when they did? The better question is how bleak would MS games library look without BC? Makes you wonder why they pushed for it so hard maybe because they already new that they would have no new games to offer and needed to appease their core audience.