PS4 NOT backward compatible with PS3

[Psionic Roshambo]

I blame Sony for spoiling people with BC, PS2 was BC launch PS3 was BC all the way back to PS1. I guess people just got used to the idea of keeping and playing the old library on the new systems. That and I think one of the Sony mouth peices said something to the effect that all Playstations would be backwards compatible, or maybe I am just remembering wrong... lol

 

[retKHAAAN]

Err. The internet wasn't widely available back then, and our communication options on a worldwide basis weren't that great either. I don't think we'll truly ever know what the situation was like back then.

As for your second point, why should I waste my time trying to present the evidence that you talked about? That's the equivalent of saying "oh the prosecution has found evidence that shows the defense was at the scene, but it's up to the defense to find that evidence for us". What? Seriously?

Multiple polls have been linked in this conversation, and they all show a similar trend and have a respectable number of respondents. By all means feel free to provide better surveys, but I don't think we're going to get them. The problem with the financial reports that everyone are on about, is that they're not specific as to the cause of the issues, and present no real data as what predictions were made in regards to specific features. Aggregate data says nothing really.

You're talking about polling a bunch of people who want everything at an affordable price as to whether they want everything at an affordable price. Sometimes it's just not doable...

As far as your evidence analogy...why the fuck would I take the time to google and link something that a) has been posted ad nauseam on this very forum, and b) you would simply ignore anyway to continue your rant on how stupid Sony is? You're perfectly fine looking like an ill-informed jackass and you can count on me to help prolong it as much as possible.

This is part of my point. Decades ago was a complete different era. There was virtually no need to add BC because the entire customer base moved forward. There are people (like my girlfriend and many others) who still play PS2 games for entertainment. The difference between then and now is that the customer base is not going to move forward.

Once again, I'm not advocating adding BC. I don't know the true loss functions associated with having BC and not having BC. I'm just saying they will be cutting off their customer base if this streaming BC doesn't work out. For example, when they had BC on PS3 ... 600 dollar price tag. It was unpopular for being so expensive that many people bought PS2 anyways. When they reduced the price of the PS3, it no longer appealed to it's customer base. Thank god that the BC consoles did bring in some people and Sony had a pretty good reputation otherwise the PS3 wouldn't be in the stage it is in today.

What exactly makes you think that the customer base is not going to move forward? And what exactly has led you to believe that customers simply went with the flow 20 years ago?

 

[Veho]

Multiple polls have been linked in this conversation, and they all show a similar trend and have a respectable number of respondents.

And we all know online polls are 100% reliable, reflect the public opinion, and are to be trusted without question. I mean, they obviously accurately reflect the will of the majority.

Oh, I'm sure a lot of people would like to see backwards compatibility (it's a really neat feature), but if they're not willing to pay for it, the point is moot.

 

[Scuba156]

I mentioned a lot of these arguments before, but they seemed to be of forgotten about and ignored...

I don't think I've face palmed this much while reading and commenting in a thread.

I do have to say though, this is the longest online argument about video games I've ever seen where no one has pulled the fanboy card. Congratulations internet! You have decided to throw away your with backwards compatibly with not using old and outdated internet insult guidelines, decided to put your efforts into having a proper argument instead, and maximizing your return out of this thread! :cheer:

 

[J-Machine]

Agreed about my Wii-U argument. The difference is that me playing the Wii-U will boost it's reputation which in return will boost sales for people who will buy new stuff. God, the amount of people that have bought Wii's after coming to my house is amazing. Even if they didn't know that you can pirate on it, it is still a hit at some of the parties I go to. I got one of my friends into Wii many years ago. He went to Berkeley and did his undergraduate there. His apartment roommates decided to buy the Wii after watching him play. Reputation is the key point here, don't underestimate it. I haven't seen anything about the Vita (other than on these forums). It nearly has no reputation like at all. All the people I know are sticking to PSPs (pirate or not).

Do you think, on average, kids will ask for Xboxes or the Vita more? Why is that? Maybe because all of their friends have Xboxes and not Vitas. We live in an era where multiplayer is a high selling point. Something that can only be done with reputation. Which is another reason why SNES did not need backwards compatibility because most of it's reputation was not focused on multi player and an upgrade was fully justified.

As for Sony being forced to upgrade, this is evidence they need better reputation more than ever.

I agree with the power or reputation however I was talking on the individual's account. however lets be reminded that if you influence 10 people to buy the system and they take to their purchases the same way you do it is only going to change how much more Nintendo is hoping on online purchases and accessories to make a profit. Of course those 10 could also buy wheelbarrows full of new content and Nintendo is able to swan dive into the money they make but like all things this is an unknown and as such the value of the reputation is also unknown. this only changes the extremes of what can or cannot happen though it is a more exiting gamble that many would take.

as for BC in the past (no pun intended) When I was growing up I had a NES to begin my life in gaming. the first time I saw backwards compatibility was with the GBC but I never realized it was that until the GBA came out. after that it was the ps2. half my life went by before I saw BC in a console and that was only after I bought a slim and read the instruction manual for it. BC means nothing to me as until then I never had it and to be honest I never asked for it or expected it. I also very rarely capitalize on it. Then again there is a generation gap explaining my standpoint already and as such people who started with the PS2 may think differently. However we are the larger demographic as not only do we buy for ourselves now but we dictate what our children will get and if we don't care about BC then we wont care if it isnt there and will still happily buy into the new console unless we have no backbone and are simply walking atms for the family we have which is a whole other can of worms altogether...

 

[Rizsparky]

I blame Sony for spoiling people with BC, PS2 was BC launch PS3 was BC all the way back to PS1. I guess people just got used to the idea of keeping and playing the old library on the new systems. That and I think one of the Sony mouth peices said something to the effect that all Playstations would be backwards compatible, or maybe I am just remembering wrong... lol

Yeah, Im hoping Nintendo doesnt keep their BC tendencies too, I don't want the next handheld to be dual screened with 3D just so that it can play 3D games of the past..

 

[Foxi4]

I do have to say though, this is the longest online argument about video games I've ever seen where no one has pulled the fanboy card. Congratulations internet! :cheer:

WIIU AND 3DS R BACKWURDS COMPATURRIBLE ERGO BETTUR NINTENDOH MASTUR RACE WOOT!

 

[Rydian]

I mentioned a lot of these arguments before, but they seemed to be of forgotten about and ignored...

Have you seen how long it took to convince Peps that BC is more expensive, the PS3 sold at a loss, more sales of a loss is a bigger net loss, etc.

Now it's on whether BC is actually wanted or not.

Any bets on the next subject, anybody? =D

 

[Gahars]

Have you seen how long it took to convince Peps that BC is more expensive, the PS3 sold at a loss, more sales of a loss is a bigger net loss, etc.

Now it's on whether BC is actually wanted or not.

Any bets on the next subject, anybody? =D

How long a person can keep their head in the sand before they need to breath?

 

[Psionic Roshambo]

How long a person can keep their head in the sand before they need to breath?

My guess is it depends on how dry the sand is.... lol

 

[Bladexdsl]

I blame Sony for spoiling people with BC

rule number 1: always blame sony

 

[Zetta_x]

You're talking about polling a bunch of people who want everything at an affordable price as to whether they want everything at an affordable price. Sometimes it's just not doable...

As far as your evidence analogy...why the fuck would I take the time to google and link something that a) has been posted ad nauseam on this very forum, and b) you would simply ignore anyway to continue your rant on how stupid Sony is? You're perfectly fine looking like an ill-informed jackass and you can count on me to help prolong it as much as possible.

What exactly makes you think that the customer base is not going to move forward? And what exactly has led you to believe that customers simply went with the flow 20 years ago?

Number of competitive alternatives to gaming answers almost all of your questions.

We are in a generation of smart phones, tablets, PC's Xboxes, flippydees, flippydoos, and widdlewarts. There is so many god damn competitive things for entertainment, the probability of someone picking the Vita given they have not used a Sony gaming console is almost none. This is why the userbase is so low, it's primarily made up of Sony customers. That's where Sony is going to make all of their money off the Vita, from past customers. However, since they limited the number of people who can purchase, the flow is restricted.

The probability of buying a SNES given you have played the NES must have been amazingly high. Evidence for this is the large amount of sales, both the NES and SNES sold so many consoles that the probability of someone owning a NES and a SNES is much higher than someone who owned an NES and not an SNES. Again, because the lack of competitive alternative consoles, it was a no brainer to move forward.

How many people were still playing NES when the N64 came out? Not as much as how many people are playing PS2 when the PS4 comes out. This is evidence the flow will stop and does not have to move forward. Maybe PS2 people will buy a PS3 and move on when the PS4 comes out, but that's not SONY's objective.

My posts were not meant to advocate BC. My posts were to enlighten what they are sacrificing by not adding BC. I've even mentioned what BC did to the PS3 in the beginning and how that failed miserably (different times so I'm not making the assumption the PS4 would repeat said failures as I have no idea what the loss functions associated to each of them). I even mentioned that PS3 emulated firmware would have the same public keys as the PS3 now which is essentially a security risk if unsigned code can be ran in the PS4. There is so many god damn reasons why Sony should not add BC.

The equation is the balance between reputation and short term profits. If they were able to take a hit on short term profits, BC is a no brainer, more reputation => more investors => more sales => win. However, as been mention, we don't know the effect of reputation although I have outlined some portion of it. So we can not accurately say which one is stronger.

 

[Scuba156]

Have you seen how long it took to convince Peps that BC is more expensive, the PS3 sold at a loss, more sales of a loss is a bigger net loss, etc.

Now it's on whether BC is actually wanted or not.

Any bets on the next subject, anybody? =D

Yeah I have, I was there man, I was freakin there!

I said about Sony's stock and their financial position but I was told that apparently they should still take the loss.

My guess is it will be about whether it's the government's fault that it lacks BC

 

[Jan1tor]

I never really cared if a system is backwards compatible or not in my decision to buy a new console. I simply keep my old unit to play on. I have a DS Phat, DS Lite, DSI, 3ds, 3ds Xl. Hell I still have my old Panasonic 3DO. So if you give up your old system that is your choice. If I was Sony I wouldn't build it in either, just to keep the cost down. It is nice when a company does it, but it is really not practical.

 

[Rydian]

Well in some cases it's practical, like the Wii-GC and 3DS-DS, but not when there's an architecture change and the previous hardware is too expensive to be negligible.

 

[Zetta_x]

Edit: Speaking out of my arsehoolllelelee

Don't reply to what I had posted here Rydian. Dear god please have missed it.

 

[joelv6]

So like, how come Sony is so much against Backwards Compatibility? Retail games, yeah, I can understand, but digital games? There's really no excuse on that one.

Sony is a hater haha that all

 

[Zetta_x]

Sony is a hater haha that all

Really? Are you serious? Do you really think Sony doesn't add digital backwards compatibility just because they are haters? You are pretty new to GBAtemp, If I explain why it's not possible you'll probably never want to come back to GBAtemp. So I'm going to save the time...

 

[retKHAAAN]

Number of competitive alternatives to gaming answers almost all of your questions.

We are in a generation of smart phones, tablets, PC's Xboxes, flippydees, flippydoos, and widdlewarts. There is so many god damn competitive things for entertainment, the probability of someone picking the Vita given they have not used a Sony gaming console is almost none. This is why the userbase is so low, it's primarily made up of Sony customers. That's where Sony is going to make all of their money off the Vita, from past customers. However, since they limited the number of people who can purchase, the flow is restricted.

The probability of buying a SNES given you have played the NES must have been amazingly high. Evidence for this is the large amount of sales, both the NES and SNES sold so many consoles that the probability of someone owning a NES and a SNES is much higher than someone who owned an NES and not an SNES. Again, because the lack of competitive alternative consoles, it was a no brainer to move forward.

How many people were still playing NES when the N64 came out? Not as much as how many people are playing PS2 when the PS4 comes out. This is evidence the flow will stop and does not have to move forward. Maybe PS2 people will buy a PS3 and move on when the PS4 comes out, but that's not SONY's objective.

That does make a lot of sense.

However, from Sony's perspective, they would be banking on the "idea" that someone would be more inclined to purchase a BC console based on already owned PS1/PS2 and to some extent PS3 games. PS1 and PS2 software sales are used-market-only. PS3 software sales will eventually be there. There is little, if any, money to be made from these transactions.

Another thing to note is that BC would ultimately lead to a potential loss of PS4 software sales in favor of the PS3 counterparts seeing as there will most certainly be simultaneous releases of things like Madden, CoD, and numerous other titles. If PS3 and PS4 games are priced the same ($60) then PS3 users are going to be getting ripped off. If PS4 games are priced at a premium ($70 let's say) then Sony is essentially competing with themselves as some customers may feel more inclined to purchase the cheaper PS3 version.

BC is exponentially more complex from a sales and marketing standpoint than a simple "let me play my old games" argument...

 

[Zetta_x]

Agreed,

Which makes sense why they are doing the streaming service (it gives them a chance to make more sales on previous games without letting people use used games).

---

If Sony is going to be successful, they will have to focus on gaming innovation. It's clear that they will need to appeal not only to previous Sony customers but they need to be competitive so they can attract the people who have not owned a Sony console. In today's market, if someone where to go out and buy a product for entertainment, they will pick one of many different things. The way money works, they will most likely not buy every entertainment product available.

I'm sad because I'm really enjoying my PS3 and would like to continue to purchase Sony consoles. However, from what I have seen of the PS4, while it does appeal to me, it doesn't seem to have a significant amount of innovation for it's price. It's going to lose when competing with other products. I won't make an investment if I feel that SONY will not be able to follow up with the console.