• 55 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for shinjiex
#1 Edited by ShinjiEx (793 posts) -

You know damn well Sony and Microsoft will "resell" last gen games digitally

Your gonna see a lot of classic PS3/Xbox 360 games being sold for $10-20

Which is not bad but it's how Ea and other publishers are gonna make extra scratch cause they know people will buy em and it does not cost much on their end to do as such

Hence in a funny way next gen consoles won't play your current gen "used games"

But overall I think it's a dick move not having backwards compatibility

Here is hoping PS4's streaming GaiKai game service is kewl ^__^

Avatar image for demoskinos
#2 Posted by Demoskinos (17280 posts) -

Expert insight from ShinjiEX here guys.

Avatar image for video_game_king
#3 Edited by Video_Game_King (36565 posts) -

@shinjiex said:

You damn well Sony and Microsoft will "resell" last gen games digitally

Even though they'd have to rewrite the code so that it'd be compatible with the newer systems? And what about the Wii U? Isn't that backwards compatible with the Wii?

Also, a thought just occurred to me: will backwards compatibility become an option later on, when previous gen hardware becomes cheap enough to build into later models, or will the ship have sailed by then?

Avatar image for shinjiex
#4 Edited by ShinjiEx (793 posts) -

@shinjiex said:

You damn well Sony and Microsoft will "resell" last gen games digitally

Even though they'd have to rewrite the code so that it'd be compatible with the newer systems? And what about the Wii U? Isn't that backwards compatible with the Wii?

A lot of 3rd party games coming out in Fall for PS3/Xbox 360 will have PS4 versions later

I doubt the code writing is costly much less have studios been working on 2 separate versions of games for current and next gen

Avatar image for milkman
#5 Edited by Milkman (18804 posts) -

I'm not sure if this really qualifies as a "conspiracy theory."

Avatar image for lordandrew
#6 Posted by LordAndrew (14600 posts) -

Ow, my brain.

Avatar image for confusedowl
#7 Posted by ConfusedOwl (1150 posts) -

I never owned a PS3 so if they release PS3 games on PS4s PSN I will throw cash at them.

Avatar image for rawknro11a
#8 Posted by RawknRo11a (559 posts) -

@shinjiex said:

@video_game_king said:

@shinjiex said:

You damn well Sony and Microsoft will "resell" last gen games digitally

Even though they'd have to rewrite the code so that it'd be compatible with the newer systems? And what about the Wii U? Isn't that backwards compatible with the Wii?

A lot of 3rd party games coming out in Fall for PS3/Xbox 360 will have PS4 versions later

I doubt the code writing is costly much less have studios been working on 2 separate versions of games for current and next gen

Those games are ones they knew from the start where getting "ported" to the new systems. What about something like say the Gears of War games, or in the case of the PS3 what about the Uncharted Games?

Both the PS3 to PS4 and XBOX 360 to XBOX one are complete changes in architecture so porting those old games might not be as simple as you think.

Beside the point, I do think we will see re-releases of some popular games from the current gen. I doubt it will happen right after the system launches, but eventually.

Avatar image for bisonhero
#9 Posted by BisonHero (10136 posts) -

You're not banned yet?

Also, people say "kewl"? Is it 1999 again?

Avatar image for maddman60620
#10 Posted by Maddman60620 (201 posts) -

Its not like the ps3 and 360 will commit seppuku once you get you hands on a new system, you just have to plug it in, then you can play all the Jade Empire you want, I know I will.........

Avatar image for shinjiex
#11 Posted by ShinjiEx (793 posts) -

Its not like the ps3 and 360 will commit seppuku once you get you hands on a new system, you just have to plug it in, then you can play all the Jade Empire you want, I know I will.........

Jade Empire is the bees knees ^__^

Avatar image for vaiz
#12 Edited by vaiz (3061 posts) -

I've noticed something kind of funny. People act like backwards compatibility is a standard and always has been, but honestly the only consoles to ever do it flawlessly were the wii and the Ps2. No sega console ever had backwards compatibility. No Nintendo console up till the Wii had it. The 360 and Ps3(eventually) didn't have it natively or flawlessly*.

When it comes right down to it, I sort of wonder why we expect it as such a given.

*By that I mean it took jumping through hoops to do and, by the end of it all, both consoles had sort of given up on it.

Avatar image for rebgav
#13 Edited by rebgav (1442 posts) -

Wait!

What?

Also;

I've noticed something kind of funny. People act like backwards compatibility is a standard and always has been, but honestly the only consoles to ever do it flawlessly were the wii and the Ps2. No sega console ever had backwards compatibility. No Nintendo console up till the Wii had it. The 360 and Ps3(eventually) didn't have it natively or flawlessly*.

When it comes right down to it, I sort of wonder why we expect it as such a given.

With the 360 and the PS3 adopting a digital distribution model for games, video and music there was reason to hope for parity with the best-in-class digital distribution models exemplified by iTunes, Steam and (to a lesser extent) Amazon, especially as these services were characterized as being a shared ecosystem for their hardware products. The news that video and music licences carry forward met with zero fanfare because it's absolutely the standard among competing services - that game licences (licenses? I don't know) do not is now an aberration within their own services, as well as by comparison to other platforms and services.

Avatar image for lordxavierbritish
#14 Edited by LordXavierBritish (6651 posts) -
Loading Video...

Avatar image for internetdotcom
#15 Posted by GorillaMoPena (3191 posts) -

There is no way the fire was hot enough to melt backwards compatibility.

Avatar image for tarsier
#16 Edited by Tarsier (1491 posts) -

conspiracy theory next gen consoles stream all audio and video happening in ur house to stellar wind database and privacy is gone.

conspiracy theory next next gen consoles will be robot AI human life management systems that display the law of lord obama on every wall of your house and keep you awake so that you can work 23 hours and serve he whose power was granted by the almighty. it will take over the role of both parents and babies will be grown in tubes and indoctrinated from birth .this is what we are supporting by purchasing a ps4 or xbox one. praise obabo!!!!

Avatar image for oldguy
#17 Posted by OldGuy (1660 posts) -

@tarsier said:

conspiracy theory next gen consoles stream all audio and video happening in ur house to stellar wind database and privacy is gone.

conspiracy theory next next gen consoles will be robots that display the law of lord obama on every wall of your house and keep you awake so that you can work 23 hours and serve he whose power was granted by the almighty. it will take over the role of both parents and babies will be grown in tubes and indoctrinated from birth .this is what you are supporting by purchasing a ps4 or xbox one. praise obabo!!!!

Minitrue and Miniluv would like a word with you... Room 101 will be ready shortly...

Avatar image for chaser324
#18 Posted by Chaser324 (7874 posts) -

It's not a conspiracy of any kind. Providing backwards compatibility is simply not a trivial thing to include. It requires either including additional hardware in the case or developing software emulation. Either of those would increase the development/production cost of the console which would mean higher price tags when they hit shelves, and in the case of software emulation, there's a pretty good chance that it just isn't doable.

Moderator
Avatar image for hailinel
#19 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

It's not a conspiracy of any kind. Providing backwards compatibility is simply not a trivial thing to include. It requires either including additional hardware in the case or developing software emulation. Either of those would increase the development/production cost of the console which would mean higher price tags when they hit shelves, and in the case of software emulation, there's a pretty good chance that it just isn't doable.

And this is precisely why the Wii U is backwards compatible with Wii games, but not GameCube titles. If the effort is put into backwards compatibility, it's easier to go only one generation back, because even if the hardware isn't that similar, it's at least a more reasonable prospect than stacking multiple layers of hardware architecture on top of each other like some crazy ziggurat of backwards compatibility.

Avatar image for theveej
#20 Posted by theveej (922 posts) -

It's not a conspiracy of any kind. Providing backwards compatibility is simply not a trivial thing to include. It requires either including additional hardware in the case or developing software emulation. Either of those would increase the development/production cost of the console which would mean higher price tags when they hit shelves, and in the case of software emulation, there's a pretty good chance that it just isn't doable.

Yep, those early $600 PS3s are a perfect example of why including additional hardware for something like backward compatibility is just a poor business decision. And I just don't think software emulation is feasible this time around.

Avatar image for i_stay_puft
#21 Posted by I_Stay_Puft (5538 posts) -

Why not just keep your old system?

Avatar image for dudeglove
#22 Edited by dudeglove (11871 posts) -

I don't think the OP understands the difficulties involved with backwards compatibility.

Avatar image for casey25
#23 Edited by Casey25 (153 posts) -

Well damn, with the new games coming out this fall i wont be able to play last-gen and next-gen games on the same syste-oh....

Oh....

Oh wait....

I can...

because they're PC games.

Avatar image for mctangle
#24 Posted by McTangle (161 posts) -

Conspiracy theory: Multinational corporations attempt to increase profits

Avatar image for nezza
#25 Edited by Nezza (386 posts) -

I'd have more sympathy for their reasoning about it being "different architectures" if there hadn't already been a very high profile example of a system moving from a PowerPC based chipset to X86 with complete software based emulation with Apple moving from Motorola to Intel a few years back.

(Edit to say I don't think that there is a conspiracy behind the lack of compatibility, only that giving a difference in architectures as the sole reason is a bit weak.)

Avatar image for truthtellah
#26 Edited by TruthTellah (9798 posts) -

To me, this is just another example of how people don't really seem to understand what videogames are and how they work. When systems are dramatically different, it really is difficult to convert a game to function on the different hardware. The best backwards compatibility you're going to get with machines like this are heavily modified versions of the originals or some kind of streaming tech, as has been suggested for the PS4.

There was always very little chance that the next PlayStation was going to be backwards compatible with the PS3, and even the new Xbox is fundamentally different from the 360. Without adding significant cost to the console, it just isn't feasible. I absolutely understand the big desire for backwards compatibility, as I love it, too. But it simply isn't realistic for these new consoles. While I imagine some game companies -will- take advantage of this reality to invest in converting some games for the new consoles, there is little reason to believe that is central factor in why they are not backwards compatible. More than any business strategies, this is about how videogame code and technology work.

Avatar image for hollitz
#27 Edited by hollitz (2142 posts) -

*puts on tinfoil hat*

At E3 Sony will say that after much soul searching they are pleased to announce full backwards compatibility for PSOne, PS2, and PS3 games. The 'no backwards compatibility' was a bluff. Microsoft took the bait.

Won't happen, but I would laugh pretty heartily if it did. The enthusiast press keeps talking about a blood bath. I want to see one.

Avatar image for truthtellah
#28 Edited by TruthTellah (9798 posts) -

To me, this is just more of an example of how much people don't really understand what videogames are and how they work. When systems are dramatically different, it really is difficult to convert a game to function on different hardware. The best backwards compatibility you're going to get with machines like this are heavily modified versions of the originals or some kind of streaming tech, as has been suggested for the PS4.

There was always very little chance that the next PlayStation was going to be backwards compatible with the PS3, and even the new Xbox is fundamentally different from the 360. Without adding significant cost to the console, it just isn't feasible. I absolutely understand the big desire for backwards compatibility, as I love it, too. But it simply isn't realistic for these new consoles. While I imagine some game companies -will- take advantage of this reality to invest in converting some games for the new consoles, there is little reason to believe that is the central factor in why they are not backwards compatible. More than any business strategies, this is about how videogame code and tech work.

Avatar image for truthtellah
#29 Posted by TruthTellah (9798 posts) -

@hollitz: They have said they may be able to use their streaming technology to allow for playing those older titles on the PS4. So, if they really wanted to invest in it, it sounds like something they -could- announce at E3. Though, that seems like quite the undertaking for them.

Avatar image for humanity
#30 Edited by Humanity (15088 posts) -

Why not just keep your old system?

I assume most people complaining about these things with any sort of vehemence on forums are probably a younger audience and will be trading in their existing console to get the new one. It's just a guess because otherwise I too don't know why you wouldn't just keep the old one.

Avatar image for jayjonesjunior
#31 Posted by jayjonesjunior (1148 posts) -

@shinjiex said:

You know damn well Sony and Microsoft will "resell" last gen games digitally

Do you know how hard/time and money consuming it is going to be to recompile PS3 (Cell Architecture) games for the PS4 (x86)? Some engines are build from the ground up for the PS3 and nothing else.

Avatar image for polygonslayer
#32 Edited by PolygonSlayer (457 posts) -

Making a version of a game that runs on a different hardware is something COMPLETELY different to emulating another hardware so that it can run that software reliably. Especially when we are talking about such wildly different hardware and there is also no way the PS4/Xbone are powerful enough to emulate their previous iterations without including parts of the old hardware, hence increasing the price by quite a lot.

Avatar image for mildmolasses
#33 Posted by MildMolasses (3200 posts) -

Why not just keep your old system?

This. I've never understood the need to have new systems play the old games. Do you people throw old systems away? If I want to play a PS2 game or an NES game, I will plug in those systems

Avatar image for silentpredator
#34 Edited by SilentPredator (160 posts) -

There is no way the fire was hot enough to melt backwards compatibility.

Well played, sir.

Avatar image for bell_end
#35 Posted by Bell_End (1234 posts) -

im beginning to think MS and Sony are in this whole gaming business for the money and not just to make me smile.

fucker!

Avatar image for commandergermanshepard
#36 Edited by CommanderGermanShepard (309 posts) -

@bell_end: Well considering they should be making me smile to get my money in the first place, maybe they are doing it wrong?

Avatar image for nictel
#37 Edited by Nictel (2695 posts) -

@i_stay_puft said:

Why not just keep your old system?

This. I've never understood the need to have new systems play the old games. Do you people throw old systems away? If I want to play a PS2 game or an NES game, I will plug in those systems

Because that's the real conspiracy, the old consoles are set to EXPLODE when the new console enters the room.

Avatar image for thrice_604
#38 Posted by THRICE_604 (217 posts) -

For Sony it would be unfeasible for them to have PS3 functionality in the PS4. They probably "could" technically shove the cell processor in. The superslim's cell is tiny but that would be so cost prohibitive to incude it into a PS4 that it would price the system into failure like the early PS3 was. Plus they have the gaikai lifeline if they can manage to get it working. As much as it really annoys me I guess I would sacrifice the BC to ensure the system isn't dead on arrival because of it's price. Though come on now I know its not heavily used but I play a ton of old stuff, I still play PS1 games and PS2 games that can be played on my PS3. Having an all encompassing system that has the entire PlayStation's history ready to play would have been killer.

Microsoft is the dick move, to use the buzz word, it's architecture isn't night and day with the 360 the way PS4/PS3 is. The Xbox One playing a 360 game should be more akin to a modern PC being able to run an old game. Xbox 360 was a customized PC for the most part, the Xbox One and the PS4 for that matter are for real just PCs in terms of hardware. Old PC games don't run 100% on new PCs there is always some jank but you can get it pretty close.

Avatar image for thrice_604
#39 Edited by THRICE_604 (217 posts) -

@mildmolasses: For me this is the first console launch I am a working adult for. The 360 launched when I was in high school and the PS3 when I was a poor college freshman. I couldn't afford these systems without the bump of selling in the old.

And now I have limited space in my entertainment set up and only two inputs for my two consoles and my DVR. Not very helpful when two consoles are coming out that cannot play those games when I envision myself still playing the games that I have now. I have to put away one system no matter what, it would have been nice for that not to be a hassle.

*Edit oops sorry about the double post didn't realize nobody else posted in almost 15 minutes.

Avatar image for spence_5060
#40 Posted by Spence_5060 (411 posts) -

@shinjiex: Does backwards compatibility include all the digital games I have on those systems like the arcade games and such?

Avatar image for phileskyline
#41 Posted by PhilESkyline (877 posts) -

If the consumer barks loud enough verbally and financially they will bend to your will. In the words of Captain Planet, the power is yours!

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
#42 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (5389 posts) -

@humanity said:

@i_stay_puft said:

Why not just keep your old system?

I assume most people complaining about these things with any sort of vehemence on forums are probably a younger audience and will be trading in their existing console to get the new one. It's just a guess because otherwise I too don't know why you wouldn't just keep the old one.

I would assume people just want to have fewer consoles filling up their entertainment center, or they want to be able to play their old games using the improvements of the new console and controller, or they don't like they idea of switching inputs all the time, or maybe every HDMI input that their TV has is currently being used. There are lots of reasons.

Avatar image for extomar
#43 Edited by EXTomar (5047 posts) -

I'm not sure what the point of the topic is. This "expert insight" is nonsense.

Avatar image for humanity
#44 Posted by Humanity (15088 posts) -
Avatar image for charlie_victor_bravo
#45 Edited by charlie_victor_bravo (1523 posts) -

@i_stay_puft said:

Why not just keep your old system?

This. I've never understood the need to have new systems play the old games. Do you people throw old systems away? If I want to play a PS2 game or an NES game, I will plug in those systems

In Xbox One situation this is ironic since they want reduce all those clunky boxes that litter your living-room by making one box that can handle all of that- and yet somehow they fail to make it so that it replaces the thing that is used to play Xbox360 games.

Avatar image for rebgav
#46 Posted by rebgav (1442 posts) -

@humanity said:

@spaceinsomniac: oh sorry, I meant good reasons.

With the fact that every unit of the 360 will last forever, the fact that the HDD will never fail and the peripherals will never break and that even if they somehow did there will always be a replacement at retail and you will always have the ability to connect to Live to download your games again, there is literally no good reason to ever desire backwards compatibility.

Games are disposable anyway, why would you ever want to play one twice?

Avatar image for clonedzero
#47 Posted by Clonedzero (4206 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@humanity said:

@spaceinsomniac: oh sorry, I meant good reasons.

With the fact that every unit of the 360 will last forever, the fact that the HDD will never fail and the peripherals will never break and that even if they somehow did there will always be a replacement at retail and you will always have the ability to connect to Live to download your games again, there is literally no good reason to ever desire backwards compatibility.

Games are disposable anyway, why would you ever want to play one twice?

I replay games all the time....who the hell plays a game just once? seems like you're wasting money. If its worth buying, then its worth playing twice, or more.

Avatar image for huntad
#48 Posted by huntad (2233 posts) -

@milkman said:

I'm not sure if this really qualifies as a "conspiracy theory."

I was thinking the same thing.

Avatar image for hunter5024
#49 Posted by Hunter5024 (6676 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@chaser324 said:

It's not a conspiracy of any kind. Providing backwards compatibility is simply not a trivial thing to include. It requires either including additional hardware in the case or developing software emulation. Either of those would increase the development/production cost of the console which would mean higher price tags when they hit shelves, and in the case of software emulation, there's a pretty good chance that it just isn't doable.

And this is precisely why the Wii U is backwards compatible with Wii games, but not GameCube titles. If the effort is put into backwards compatibility, it's easier to go only one generation back, because even if the hardware isn't that similar, it's at least a more reasonable prospect than stacking multiple layers of hardware architecture on top of each other like some crazy ziggurat of backwards compatibility.

You have to admit though, a pyramid console with a disc drive on each section would look pretty cool.

Avatar image for extomar
#50 Posted by EXTomar (5047 posts) -

I do think many people overvalue video games let alone software in general. I have a closet full of unplayable games most of which I played once. That isn't due to the technical limitations but that the design and pace make many of them impenetrable. They simply were not that compelling back then where they really aren't worth the effort of resurrecting today.