PS4 NOT backward compatible with PS3

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[Hielkenator]

I can see plenty of you harping on with all your knowledge as to why the machine won't have BC, but you're basically preaching to the converted here... most of the users on here will actually know the reason themselves... What you're completely missing is the average gamer (who represent a larger market than we do by the way - get over it) will probably find the idea the brand spanking new console 'isnt powerful' enough to play old games bewildering like Peps is saying.... "You're saying this new PS4 can't run Sonic 2 that I downloaded on my PS3 last year? Worra piece o shit!"
Come on, ask anybody in the gaming retail business what it's like trying to explain Wii U (or earlier 3DS) to the masses....

If they include 'BC' from the getgo via Gaikai there's still naturally a big problem: your save games aren't any use there without one MAJOR league headache for Sony to set up, and so said 'clueless' gamers will still be WTFing, so perhaps Sony are doing the right thing by stopping any purchases from being transferred too. Here's hoping the list of titles available at launch is good enough for everyone to think 'who gives a shit about owd PS3 games?'

Personally I'd have liked BC of course - get to chuck the PS3 upstairs onto my bedroom telly then! But as one of you that knows why it ain't gonna happen - it's no big deal really...

Actually I think it's an unwise decision on Sony's behalf. Not for the reasons you mention though...
People getting off the bandwagon, by splitting up you own marketshare is never wise to begin with. I had my time with them for 3 generations now, nice milestone to get of the bandwagon.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I can see plenty of you harping on with all your knowledge as to why the machine won't have BC, but you're basically preaching to the converted here... most of the users on here will actually know the reason themselves... What you're completely missing is the average gamer (who represent a larger market than we do by the way - get over it) will probably find the idea the brand spanking new console 'isnt powerful' enough to play old games bewildering like Peps is saying.... "You're saying this new PS4 can't run Sonic 2 that I downloaded on my PS3 last year? Worra piece o shit!"
Come on, ask anybody in the gaming retail business what it's like trying to explain Wii U (or earlier 3DS) to the masses....

If they include 'BC' from the getgo via Gaikai there's still naturally a big problem: your save games aren't any use there without one MAJOR league headache for Sony to set up, and so said 'clueless' gamers will still be WTFing, so perhaps Sony are doing the right thing by stopping any purchases from being transferred too. Here's hoping the list of titles available at launch is good enough for everyone to think 'who gives a shit about owd PS3 games?'

Personally I'd have liked BC of course - get to chuck the PS3 upstairs onto my bedroom telly then! But as one of you that knows why it ain't gonna happen - it's no big deal really...

...So your reasoning is that not including native BC is bad because consumers will think the console is weak and can't run current gen games? I know consumers are stupid but they're not that stupid.

They take one look at the games and they see they look better than current gen. Why didn't this happen with the PS3 Slim? Hell the PS3 Slim made the PS3 sell as well as it did. Without it I don't think we'd be seeing a PS4, or any Sony home console after that.

Consumers are pretty stupid but even at their stupidest form they'll see 4 is greater than 3 and assume 4 is more powerful than 3. And it is.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[Scuba156]

So let's just add this old, and still expensive hardware to the new ps4, increase the price by around $100 and everyone will be happy right guys?

Don't forget that Sony hasn't been in the best position lately, with junk stock, which really doesn't put them in a position to add this hardware and take a massive loss on it. They are a business, and one that's in financial problems, they really need to turn a profit.

 

[mysticwaterfall]

@Hielkenator you completely miss AW'a point I think.... Having a hardware apdater to play old games is nowhere near the same as built in BC. The vcs adapter for the 5200 cost 70$. That's a lot to pay just to play old games, especially if you already had a 2600.

Besides that one, the other ones where in no way "official" or BC as intellivison and colecovision were made by tottally different companies. It would be like Nintendo making an adapter that allowed the genesis to play snes games.

So, the point still is BC is a relativley new idea.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[Scuba156]

Again assuming that Sony would pass on the cost to the customer. Odds are, they wouldn't pass on the full cost at all, because it means there would be a huge increase in demand for the product, and thus they can profit much more easily. Backwards compatibility means more sales for the console, the games for that console, and more sales for games for the previous generation of that console.

Why should the consumer care that Sony hasn't been in a good position lately? The only reason Sony are in the position in the first place, is because they've been making a bunch of stupid decisions recently that don't take into account how the average consumer behaves and their purchasing habits. Even though I personally don't like the majority of Nintendo products, and never played a Zelda game or liked the Mario series, I think from a business perspective they're absolute geniuses. They fully understand how the average consumer behaves and are clearly exploiting it. Same with the likes of Valves, who actually understand why consumers pirate products etc.

They would have to pass it onto the customer, otherwise it would be a massive loss to them that would not be able to turn as much as a profit which they need to stay alive.

The consumer shouldn't care, but the stock owners/ investors definitely do, and it's not easy to market something to them that isn't going to turn a profit if they take the hit for it

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[KingVamp]

We already got people here at the temp going to buy ps3 instead with the announcement of ps4, so there is some backing to this bc argument. I talked with someone about the ps4 and he said he is fine with his ps3 for now.

 

[ZAFDeltaForce]

i have both a Ps3 and ps2 they wont last 30 years like my snes and genesis what will i do then rebuy hundreds of games? if you had anywhere near my collection of games u'd have a problem aswell. The PS4 is optical disc based right? most likely so theres no excuse to not play ps1 ps2 ps3 games make a adaptor that will play the games if it makes the system to expensive to include inside. The people who are ok with sony doing this are sheeps let them tell you whats right some more.

A little part of me died inside when I read that.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

A little part of me died inside when I read that.

To be fair they do have an adapter for PS3 games.

 

[Scuba156]

Bloody hell, why can't people read?

Spending the extra money without increasing price = More customers = More sales = More profit = Potentially winning the generation.

Why on earth are you assuming that the number of customers and sales won't increase? As I've said, the number of console and games sales for the PS4 will increase, and the number of game sales for the PS3 will also increase. That of course, is highly attractive to stock owners and investors and customers. It's a win-win-win scenario.

Bloody hell, why can't people use logic?

No, spending the extra money without increasing price = more customers = more sales = less profit per hardware sale (as the base hardware loss is higher)

The amount of software sales would have to dramatically increase to offset the costs of the hardware, we are talking an average attach rate of at least 15, and that's not second hand games of course, which would have to be pretty amazing to achieve. Its not financially feasible.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[Veho]

Less profit per hardware sale, but again you're ignoring the huge influx of new customers which would offset that.

Not if they're actually losing money on every hardware sale. In which case, more customers, bigger losses.

 

[Sicklyboy]

...So your reasoning is that not including native BC is bad because consumers will think the console is weak and can't run current gen games? I know consumers are stupid but they're not that stupid.

They take one look at the games and they see they look better than current gen. Why didn't this happen with the PS3 Slim? Hell the PS3 Slim made the PS3 sell as well as it did. Without it I don't think we'd be seeing a PS4, or any Sony home console after that.

Consumers are pretty stupid but even at their stupidest form they'll see 4 is greater than 3 and assume 4 is more powerful than 3. And it is.

I mean hell, don't even get me started on iPad sales. All you have to do is tell the next idiot in line that the 4 is shinier than the 3 and they'll be frothing at the mouth.

[...]Have you ever worked in retail stores? That's the true meaning behind the phrase "the customer is always right" (to which you'll subsequently learn to hate). You have to accept that the customer is right, no matter how stupid they sound.

Have YOU ever worked in a retail store? I have. If you have any sort of a backbone and aren't afraid of the wrath of corporate management, you quickly learn how to politely tell the customer that they are in fact wrong while explaining why and what the correct option is. If you don't just go "Lol you're retarded bro" and actually explain where they're making an incorrect assumption, they're usually pretty happy about that.

[...]People who would purchase a console because of graphics alone are a niche audience.

Tell me you're fucking joking... Again, going back to what I just said to Guild, have you ever SEEN people buy iPads? Tell them the new one is shinier. Tell them that it has a higher resolution screen ("what does that mean?"). Tell them simply that it's "better" without going into details (so the Apple 4 pad is better than the Apple 2 pad? Can I use Word on it then?") And how many times are they going to go with the "Apple 2 pad"? 9/10. First hand experience right here. Why? Because it's newer. It looks better (and doesn't at all). It does more (and doesn't at all).

You're right that people will assume 4 is greater than 3. Hence it's natural for them to assume that 3 will operate in 4, especially considering that assumption has been valid for a very long time with the majority of other console launches. It's nothing to do with assuming a platform is weaker.

"that assumption has been valid for a very long time" No, it really hasn't. True BC is a relatively new thing. I may be missing a console or two here, but this is the BC we're looking at:
GB/P> GBC> GBA/SP/M
GC+GB/C/A> Wii-GB/C/A
Wii > WiiU
NDS+GBA>DSi-GBA>3DS
Xbox~>Xbox 360
PS>PS2~>PS3

Without having a hardware converter, I believe this is all of the BC we're looking at. With the exception of PS1 and handhelds, this is a very recent thing, all considered.

If I could tell you how many customers I deal with on a daily basis that are surprised that DS games work on a 3DS, or that Wii games work in a WiiU, you'd lose your shit.

Heck, I even have techy friends who don't really want a PS4 because they can't play PS3 titles on it (they currently don't have a PS3).

THEN THEY MUST REALLY HAVE WANTED A PS3 WHEN IT WAS RELEVANT THEN, RIGHT?

And edit, for great justice:

Less profit per hardware sale, but again you're ignoring the huge influx of new customers which would offset that.

I have $100, and I give it to a friend, he gives me $90 back.
I've lost $10.
I have $200, and I split it between two friends. They each give me $90 back.
I've lost $20.
I have $300, and I split it between three friends. They each give me $90 back.
I've lost $30.

See where I'm going with that?

 

[Scuba156]

Less profit per hardware sale, but again you're ignoring the huge influx of new customers which would offset that.

If the number of customers remained the same, obviously profit will be significantly less. However, since we have plenty of evidence that shows a large majority of potential customers are pissed off at the lack of backwards compatibility, we know that if Sony did introduce it, then the decrease in profit per sale will most likely lead to overall higher turnover.

It doesn't matter what new customer base you bring in, the percentage of software sold would still need to significantly increase PER hardware unit sold to be able to turn a profit just to make up for it, and that likely hood is minimal to impossible for them to be able to promise/prove to investors/stock owners let alone achieve. If they could bring in another 2 million customers in the first year by having BC, It wouldn't mean anything if each and every customer (even outside that 2 mill) doesn't achieve the attach rate that would be needed to turn a profit.

I would also take that evidence with a grain of salt, as I'm sure we all know how that COD:Blops 2 boycott went. People will complain but in the end they will become customers if they want the product.

 

[Hielkenator]

@Hielkenator you completely miss AW'a point I think.... Having a hardware apdater to play old games is nowhere near the same as built in BC. The vcs adapter for the 5200 cost 70$. That's a lot to pay just to play old games, especially if you already had a 2600.

Besides that one, the other ones where in no way "official" or BC as intellivison and colecovision were made by tottally different companies. It would be like Nintendo making an adapter that allowed the genesis to play snes games.

So, the point still is BC is a relativley new idea.

I've been there.
I even have a yoko game-copier, BC in whateverform imaginable is BC the way I see it.
Whilst they may or may not manufactured the harware to do so, licencing reared it's ugly head back in the day.
So you post does not speak out of experience.
It's like saying the atari 2600 had no bc. BC in earlier days was there for pure financial benefits.
Nowadays its to keep people where they are. This count for blu-ray players, telephones.
It's the way technology works, it builds upon it's former tech. Sony left it out for vague reasons.
It splits fanbase, wich also costs money in the long run.
Also there's more behind the scenes, ending contracts etc....they only care about money.

 

[Scuba156]

I've been there.
I even have a yoko game-copier, BC in whateverform imaginable is BC the way I see it.
Whilst they may or may not manufactured the harware to do so, licencing reared it's ugly head back in the day.
So you post does not speak out of experience.
It's like saying the atari 2600 had no bc. BC in earlier days was there for pure financial benefits.
Nowadays its to keep people where they are. This count for blu-ray players, telephones.
It's the way technology works, it builds upon it's former tech. Sony left it out for vague reasons.
It splits fanbase, wich also costs money in the long run.
Also there's more behind the scenes, ending contracts etc....they only care about money.

A business that only cares about money? That's the first I've heard of this zany idea

 

[Deleted-185407]

-