PS4 NOT backward compatible with PS3

[emigre]

Again, some PS3's editions HAVE PS1/PS2 compatibility, not all unfortunately.

All PS3s have PS1 compatibility.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Calm down, I have a DS Lite and I have a Nintendo Wii which I bought in 2011 when it still had GC compatibility.
Not to mention Sony MAKES you buy games that you actually owned on physical copy on PSN. Such as PSP UMD games on the Vita and PS1/PS2 games on the PS3.

Nintendo also physically forces you (ie Reggie comes to your house and puts you into a chokehold with his strong thighs) to buy NES, SNES, and N64 games for your Wii.

Sony is not the bad guy here. They cut backwards compatibility because it was expensive. Simple as that. They then offered PS2 games and PSX games to those who don't have them or really want to rebuy them.

Let's not mention the HD Collections which are really solid deals and come with updated graphics, trophy support, and other little goodies.

 

[retKHAAAN]

Honestly not sure what you're on about referring to digital counterparts, that's a different discussion entirely and is out of scope of the debate. We can discuss the argument of encouraging people to buy digital counterparts another time. As for your last point, you're again assuming that BC automatically equates to poor launch. Correlation does not mean causation. It could be an entirely different reason as to why BC was not included in the least. Perhaps they tried to implement BC but couldn't due to time constraints, or perhaps they encountered some sort of huge technical limitation (not because of different processors), or perhaps they had issues with IBM and didn't want to work with them anymore. You don't know what the situation was, neither do I, and that's why I'm highly interested in finding out what the rational behind it was.

Why would I be pissed about that? That's good news? Am I missing something?

No where am I assuming that BC equates to a poor launch. I wrote BC =/= a successful launch... But you are certainly assuming that BC will lead to a successful launch.

And if you read the link I posted closely, it says that all PS4 games will be availble for digital download while only SOME will be available on disc. So chances are, if theres ever a PS5, arguing for BC for it will be even more futile than it is now... (Though at that point it'll be cost effective to implement it anyways since they'll likely be sticking to a similar architecture)

 

[Foxi4]

Again, some PS3's editions HAVE PS1/PS2 compatibility, not all unfortunately.
*Sony wants to make money*

Spoiler

That's sort of what companies do.

Oh goodie, did I found an Sony fan boy? YAY!!!

How does stating a fact and supporting it with irrefutable evidence make me a fanboy? You insult me without knowing me - for your information, I've played on Nintendo consoles before you were even born.

 

[Scuba156]

Oh goodie, did I found an Sony fan boy? YAY!!!

And then someone has to go use that word. Congratulations! GBATemps wanker of the day! Stiff competition!

 

[Scuba156]

Spoiler

That's sort-of what companies do.

Your joking right? Then they must be doing it wrong obviously...

 

[emigre]

That's sort-of what companies do.

Foxi, you don't understand Bro. Nintendo practice altruism and fairness, as illustrated by their price fixing.

 

[Foxi4]

Foxi, you don't understand Bro. Nintendo practice altruism and fairness, as illustrated by their price fixing.

You mean to say that the production costs of the 3DS didn't magically drop by $80 dollars after less than 6 months since its release?

...my god.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[the_randomizer]

You mean to say that the production costs of the 3DS didn't magically drop by $80 dollars after less than 6 months since its release?

...my god.

You forget, at least the 3DS has outsold the Vita 10;1 in sales.

 

[McHaggis]

...pretty much sums up my attitude towards this thread.

 

[Gahars]

Peps.gif

 

[Veho]

I'm well aware that online polls aren't perfect. No form of research is perfect either and are entirely prone to human error.

But none as much as online polls.

Unfortunately, we have nothing else to go on, yet you claim so adamantly that your opinion is correct.

We have nothing to go on at all, yet you claim so adamantly that your opinion is correct, and everyone else is "irrational" for disagreeing or daring to have a differing opinion.

No, wait, in fact we have several other examples you refuse to take into consideration because "correlation doesn't imply causation", yet you insist on pushing a source that's demonstrably flawed.

Here's food for thought, what if these polls are underestimating the amount of people who care about backwards compatibility? Ever thought about that? Now provide proof that these numbers are in fact overestimated.

Oh yes, I spent many an hour considering the possibility that people who don't care about the issue would take time and effort to vote in the poll, while enthusiastic people with a strong opinion on the subject (and since the choice is between "I want BC" and "I don't care", only one choice will have the enthusiastic supporters) couldn't be arsed to voice the opinion they happily voice everywhere else. I considered it, and decided it wasn't very probable.

Now provide proof that these numbers are valid, other than "they support me so they must be true".

You have provided no proof that BC will drop launch sales.

I never said it would. I said a higher price would drop launch sales. You seem to think it wouldn't.

You have provided no proof that people don't want BC.

I never said people didn't want BC.

You have provided no proof that BC is very expensive to implement.

You have provided no proof that BC is cheap to implement. And your entire argument hinges on the assumption it would cost less than $50 on the outside, but closer to zero. Now prove that assumption.

You have provided no proof of anything you are saying, and you are instead trying to dismiss the only evidence we have, because it doesn't align with your opinion.

I'm not "trying", I explained in detail, several times over, with links and examples, why it's not valid. The only "evidence" we have is horribly flawed, unreliable, biased and tangential. Show me a poll that asks "what would you rather have, a lower price tag or BC". That's a poll with equally motivating choices, and one more likely to yield valid results.

And I have provided proof for everything I actually said. Stop pinning other people's arguments on me and demanding I "prove" them.

That's highly hypocritical. So either provide proof of your statements, or stand down.

Pot, kettle, black. Your only argument is "I think so and so should everyone else", and refuse to acknowledge other people's opinions because yours is the only one that matters. That, and ignoring 90% of everyone's points because they're too hard to argue.

Now, if that's the only problem you have with my post, how about you address the rest of it? Or should I assume you acknowledge the rest and agree with it?

 

[Qtis]

Calm down, I have a DS Lite and I have a Nintendo Wii which I bought in 2011 when it still had GC compatibility.
Not to mention Sony MAKES you buy games that you actually owned on physical copy on PSN. Such as PSP UMD games on the Vita and PS1/PS2 games on the PS3.

You actually skipped all the questions I posed. Also you do know how wrong the second line is if you consider every company is offering legacy game downloads via VC (Nintendo), PSN (Sony) and Xbox emulation (Microsoft). None of the companies actually give you the download for free even though you may own the games.

You got it all wrong. Sony gives you the possibility of buying games on PSN that aren't manufactured and sold new anymore. Also considering the prices of the games ($5-10 for PSX classics and most PSP games ($50 for the complete FF saga)), I can't see anyone wanting to pay the extortionate prices of some of the used games. Also sometimes it's just more convenient to buy the games from PSN vs buy physical copies. By the way, a fun fact about the PSP to PSVita UMD transfer: Sony could give you the choice of transferring the games for free, but the publishers/developers of the games don't want it to happen.

Buying PSP games for the PSVita on PSN is the only option for playing the games on the console (not counting hacking). It's not like you can stuff discs into carts or something in their current form? It's just normal moving forwards in technology. I don't get the problem of being able to buy PSP games, since quite a few people never have had PSPs and don't want to buy yet another console when the money can be used to buy the games.

Also as many people have pointed out, the PS3 still supports PS1 games just like before. They haven't removed it and probably never will. No real reason for that.

PS2 support was dropped mainly due to the wide availability of PS2 and that the console was already dirt cheap to buy (new and used) and of course the obvious point of the PS2 support being a nice addition, but not a necessary deal breaker feature.

All in all, not everyone wants certain features on consoles. The Wii online will be dead for most games in a matter years and after that the last games will die quite quickly when the WiiU versions are released. If there is no online available, why the need for online capabilities on a gaming console? Netflix&Co is a nice bonus for the Wii, but considering the console can't produce HD picture for Netflix and everything and the kitchen sink have an ability to play Netflix content (dedicated client or via a web browser), it's irrelevant. Kinda like having a DVD player when everything starts supporting BluRay and you buy a compatible device.

Just my 5 cents.

 

[TheDarkSeed]

They should at least give it ps1 compatibility. I have one game for the ps1 and it would be nice to know that I could load it in and play it.

 

[Rydian]

"You have provided no proof that BC is very expensive to implement."
Yet I and others have posted teardowns and cost analysis of the PS3/PS2 backwards compatibility as precedent, outlined a bare minimum of which of the PS3 parts would need to be in the PS4 for backwards compatibility, and then linked teardowns with estimates of the costs of those parts.

Peps, you're either a very patient troll, or somebody who can never admit when they're wrong.
I'd report you for trolling, but knowing the GBAtemp mods, they'll tl;dr it and either remove ALL the posts, or do nothing.

 

[Psionic Roshambo]

18 pages and the debate rages on lol

If you ask me BC is one those nice selling points.

On Sony's side yeah BC isn't doing them any favors. It's expensive and difficult to implement, it cuts sales of new games and resale of old games.

On the consumer side they really like BC, it saves them money and provides them with entertainment. Also its nice to know those 50 and 60 dollar games are playable on your new shiny. There's a nice feeling I get when I look through my library of PS1 and PS2 games and play them on the PS3. Sort of makes you feel all warm and fuzzy.

Which one is right? Both, but in my opinion this is the best time for Sony to cut BC.

Coming off the sales of the PS1 BC for the PS2 was a good way to retain those customers, same thing with coming from the PS2 to the PS3. The problem was the PS3 just cost so much it almost killed the company and the entire brand. So there are a lot less customers to piss off this time around. (Not trying to get into how the PS3 has 50% less customers than the PS2 did.) In a nutshell this is how Sony can lower the price of the unit and try to lure some of those lost customers back into the fold. How well it will work remains to be seen.

 

[Foxi4]

You forget, at least the 3DS has outsold the Vita 10;1 in sales.

How is that in any way related to price fixing?

You and me both know that if not for the underwhelming sales and the PSVita looming on the horizon, the price cut would not come so early and would not be as severe.

 

[mechagouki]

Nintendo also physically forces you (ie Reggie comes to your house and puts you into a chokehold with his strong thighs) to buy NES, SNES, and N64 games for your Wii.

I didn't pay a cent for the Virtual Console 8, 16 and 64-bit games I have on my Wii. Anyone who can read, and has access to the internet could be in the same position in under an hour.

I would say the only systems where BC made a significant difference were DS/DSL and PS2. Playing PS1 games was the only reason I bought a PSP, but I'm really old and owned a PS1 almost at launch. I don't think it was a feature that contributed in any really significant way to PSP sales.

 

[Scuba156]

I didn't pay a cent for the Virtual Console 8, 16 and 64-bit games I have on my Wii. Anyone who can read, and has access to the internet could be in the same position in under an hour.

I would say the only systems where BC made a significant difference were DS/DSL and PS2. Playing PS1 games was the only reason I bought a PSP, but I'm really old and owned a PS1 almost at launch. I don't think it was a feature that contributed in any really significant way to PSP sales.

Piracy is irrelevant as your not a customer, your not the target market, and contribute to nothing.