• 122 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Edited 1 year, 10 months ago

Poll: How Important is Backwards Compatibility for PS Orbis PS4 to you as a consumer? (298 votes)

It's a major insensitive when considering purchasing the next PlayStation Console System 33%
I don't mind or care cause I have small library of PS3 games 67%

For me it's a major factor in general for next gen consoles to play video games from current to previous consoles

However strong rumors suggest Sony will be doing streaming PS3 video games via PS Orbis PS4 as well possibly PS1 & PS2

Which I'd be cool with if the subscription price is decent most likely streaming video games will be part of PS Plus however

But at the end of the day being able to use my PS3 discs would be nice and would help boost sells of the PS Orbis PS4

#1 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

Quite a bit, as I don't own a PS3 and am stupidly lazy.

#2 Edited by awesomeusername (4218 posts) -

Where's the "I'm keeping my PS3 so it doesn't matter to me" option?

#3 Posted by Morningstar (2242 posts) -

Not at all, even if I have a big library of games.

#4 Posted by C2C (861 posts) -

You got a typo in the first choice buddy.

But to answer the question, backwards compatibility is pretty important to me. If there was a limited run like there was for the PS3, that would actually make me consider buying one quite close to launch.

#5 Posted by TheManWithNoPlan (6002 posts) -

I plan to keep my Ps3, so I don't care if there is. Besides, if there's no backwards compatibility, then it's cheaper for Sony to produce. Which means a cheaper price point.

#6 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5818 posts) -

Yeah, I have no intention of selling my PS3 anytime soon. BC isn't really a big deal to me right now.

#7 Posted by Dagbiker (6978 posts) -

I wouldn't care about backwards compatibility if the system lasted for more then 3 years and I could count on them to continue their online services forever. But considering XBOX online got shut down 5 years after the Xbox 360 launched I cant see that being the case.

#8 Posted by ssj4raditz (1125 posts) -

You need more than those two choices for this poll. Too restricting.

Why would I want to play old games on a new system? If I get a PS4, I'm going to play PS4 games on it.

#9 Posted by Cold_Wolven (2295 posts) -

I don't have that many PS3 games and like the PS2 if I want to play a specific game then it's just as simple as hooking up the HDMI and power cable.

#10 Edited by dungbootle (2428 posts) -

Like not at all

Why is the second option such a specific case? I just don't care about BC, that's all.

#11 Posted by Pr1mus (3951 posts) -

It'd be great to have it but it's not essential and in the case of PS3 games most likely impossible anyway.

#12 Posted by Neonie (438 posts) -

Your second choice is weirdly worded. I have a sizable library of PS3 games but still don't care about backwards comparability. I'm getting a new console to play the games the new console can play, not play the games from the old generation of console because I have the old generation of the console if I want to play those games.

#13 Posted by Mirado (1057 posts) -

I wonder if the PS4 will (or can) even have backwards compatibility. When the PS3 did it with the PS2, they initially slapped the Emotion Engine chip right in it (before progressing, or perhaps regressing, to software based emulation). Something tells me that the PS4 neither has the power to emulate a PS3 nor the necessary margins to include a Cell (or any hardware specifically meant for PS3 emulation for that matter).

I'm sure they'd rather brag about being able to play all your PS3 games (if hardware based) or at least most (if software based), rather than the limited streaming selection they'll have. (Unless they aim to turn that into a whole business model, of course.)

#14 Posted by prestonhedges (1961 posts) -

Thank you for participating in Sony's consumer poll. We will take your opinion into consideration.

#15 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

I don't care about backwards compatibility but my library of PS3 games is medium sized, so I couldn't vote. I don't really see how it matters anyway, it's not like your PS3 will explode when the new one comes out.

#16 Posted by groverat (165 posts) -

Zero percentage points of giving a damn.

#17 Posted by DarthOrange (3908 posts) -

Eh not really important. As long as my PS store purchases carry over I'll be happy. The disc based stuff will be a bummer to lose but if I am buying a new console I am doing it to play new games first and foremost.

#18 Posted by JCGamer (671 posts) -

Yea. While it was nice to play sole PS2 games on the PS3-I only did it to play 2 games: God of War 2 and Dragon Quest VIII. While backwards compatibility is a nice "back of box" feature, how many people really use it?

#19 Edited by bassman2112 (858 posts) -

I still have a Backwards Compatible PS3, so I'm not ultra worried.

#20 Posted by Funkydupe (3321 posts) -

It will definitely not be the deciding factor for me personally. It is nice; but; even with a PS4; you will be able to own and play a PS3; perhaps you already own one so you're pretty much sorted.

#21 Posted by Zebracal (74 posts) -

Nice inputs to everyone. No I really don't know if the backwards compatibility is important or not.

#22 Edited by Malarkain (106 posts) -

This coming generation may be the first time I buy a Playstation (I know!). So it would be nice to have backwards compatability so I can go back and visit the big PS3 titles. On the other hand, if Sony does a good job of just putting all of those titles in the PSN store, I'll be fine with it. Really, I just wanna play Tales of Xillia man.

#23 Posted by Fawkes (253 posts) -

I'd probably prefer it. I got a backwards compatible PS3 as soon as they announced they were taking that out. I only used it a few times though, so I don't know why I care.

Also I'm not sure what it says about the value of PS+ if the instant game library doesn't carry over. It would probably make me not want to renew.

#24 Posted by hidys (1029 posts) -

I'd like it but it isn't make or break to me.

#25 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I will not make the mistake of ditching my previous gen hardware too quickly (probably won't sell it at all, worth so little) but backwards compat would be a huge plus in my eyes.

#26 Posted by Quarters (1883 posts) -

It'd be cool, but the amount of work and extra price raising they would have to do to include it probably isn't worth it. I'm cool with keeping my PS3.

#27 Posted by seamus85 (118 posts) -

you need more option. btw

i have a large PS3 collection and I'm keeping my PS3 so it doesn't matter to me.

#28 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

By the way this is less of an issue, why? It's not like the PS2 where a lot of people are running at 480/576i on LCDS which are notoriously bad at displaying SD content, especially the really cheap ones. (also most old games aren't widescreen)

HDMI isn't going away, whatever your games look like now won't change, they won't suddenly be fuzzy or hazy like PS2/Wii games. The biggest problem with playing games from last gen was how they looked on modern televisions, as the next consoles won't be operating above 1080P (2k, 4k, not going to happen) it won't be the same issue if you choose to play a PS3 game in 2 years time.

My plasma is pretty high end and does an admirable job at scaling but you can still tell it's SD being blown up on a screen designed for 720 or 1080P.

Still, it does mean you'd have to hang on to an older console if you want to play those games but at least you won't have to worry about it being like the experience of playing PS2 games on a 40" widescreen LCD.

#29 Posted by DukesT3 (1945 posts) -

Not a huge deal breaker for me. Its something I'd probably care about if I get one at launch since I'd probably pick up maybe three launch games at most with it. So it would be nice to still play some PS3 games on it until the following year.

#30 Edited by Demoskinos (15163 posts) -

Where is the 3rd option of "Yo, I got a shit load of PS3 games but I don't mind hooking up the PS3 if I need to play that shit?"

#31 Edited by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

My PS2 is still hooked up and I suspect that my PS3 will follow suit when I get my PS4. I have a large collection of PS3 games and while it would be nice to have them play on the PS4 it simply isn't a big deal. There will be new games that I will be wanting to play.

Also there are those Gaikai rumours which could potentially be a nice alternative to backwards compatibility.

#32 Edited by Lydian_Sel (2501 posts) -

In the age where so many games are getting HD updates, backwards compatibility seems like a slightly dated argument.

#33 Posted by mellotronrules (1250 posts) -

i haven't owned a sony product since the ps1. that said, i'd appreciate the backwards compatibility so i can check out some ps3 exclusives i've missed. i typically only buy one console per generation, and i'm leaning hard towards sony (since i had a 360 this past one). if the streaming turns out to be real and works as advertised, that'll push me over the edge for sure.

#34 Posted by Veektarius (5024 posts) -

Backward compatibility would be a selling point for me precisely because I *don't* have a PS3. If buying a PS4 gave me a chance to digitally download the best PS3 games, sort of like XBL on Demand originally was, it'd increase my chances of getting it for sure.

#35 Posted by Hector (3380 posts) -

If they can offer a catalog of old games through streaming or on their online store I am fine with that.

#36 Posted by SuperWristBands (2266 posts) -

I still have and use my PS2 when I wanna play those. Backwards compatibility is not a big deal to me. I'll just keep the PS3 around like I already do with the PS2.

#37 Posted by BlatantNinja23 (928 posts) -

I want my PSN games but have zero interest in retail titles.

#38 Edited by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

It's not a deal breaker but it's a very desired feature for most consumers, myself included. Considering what we've heard in terms of specs for the next gen consoles however, I can see backwards compatibility being a problem for Sony (trying to emulate the Cell processor and all).

#39 Posted by triple07 (1198 posts) -

I really want it because I don't have a PS3 anymore but I have some games for it that I haven't played with no way to play them unless the new console is backwards compatible.

#40 Posted by Miketakon (514 posts) -

I'd love to have it but if it's not there oh well. Ive already started getting non exclusive games on Steam.

#41 Posted by TruthTellah (9478 posts) -

It's very important. Not essential, but it would be a big selling point that would make me go for it over the next Microsoft console. I don't own a PS3; so, there are plenty of great games I'd get to play right at launch. Backwards compatibility makes the prospect of investing in a new console much more appealing.

#42 Edited by mellotronrules (1250 posts) -

@sathingtonwaltz said:

Considering what we've heard in terms of specs for the next gen consoles however, I can see backwards compatibility being a problem for Sony (trying to emulate the Cell processor and all).

i think that's the idea behind the cloud rumour. if they have a bunch of ps3 mainframes doing the heavy lifting, they can pipe that video to the ps4 and emulation becomes a non-issue. as long as it works, it's a pretty great idea. but the quality of experience is everything. my fingers are crossed.

probably wouldn't work for any twitch-style games (fighting, racing, etc). but for jrpgs and the like (i'm thinking of Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch and Valkyria Chronicles specifically)- it could be great.

#43 Edited by Stonyman65 (2873 posts) -

I still like playing old games, so yeah, that's a pretty big thing for me. Not a deal breaker if the next consoles don't have backwards compatibility, but that would really suck. Backwards compatibility means just one less thing I have to keep hooked up to my TV or lying around the house somewhere collecting dust. It's just more convenient that way.

#44 Posted by DaMisterChief (628 posts) -

Anyone with a BIG library will probably keep their PS3 and probably never touch PS3 games again once they get the new console. Also CELL to the processor rumored i'll be surprised to sell backward compatability

#45 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1606 posts) -

It would be really nice to have full compatibility so I wouldn’t have to leave my PS3 plugged in on my desk. I’ve got a really dumb setup that involves swapping audio cables into a single-input amp and swapping HDMI cables into a single-input video converter, so every added console means another set of cables to manage.

There’s also the issue of what I’d do if my PS3 died. If the PS4 also played PS3 games, I’ll be set until the PS5 software emulates PS3 games. Unless this Gaikai layer is indistinguishable (in quality and latency) from raw gameplay, I have very little interest in using it.

@darthorange said:

Eh not really important. As long as my PS store purchases carry over I'll be happy. The disc based stuff will be a bummer to lose but if I am buying a new console I am doing it to play new games first and foremost.

Hate to break it to you, but any non-emulated (i.e. not PS1 classics) stuff you bought on the store is in the same compatibility category as disc-based games. This includes PSN games and retail games. The form of media (disc or hard drive) has nothing to do with whether or not it will run on the PS4.

#46 Posted by joshth (508 posts) -

Since I only had a X-box and Wii this generation, part of the reason I'm interested in the Orbis/PS4 is so I can go back and play those PS3 exclusives.

#47 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

@sathingtonwaltz said:

Considering what we've heard in terms of specs for the next gen consoles however, I can see backwards compatibility being a problem for Sony (trying to emulate the Cell processor and all).

i think that's the idea behind the cloud rumour. if they have a bunch of ps3 mainframes doing the heavy lifting, they can pipe that video to the ps4 and emulation becomes a non-issue. as long as it works, it's a pretty great idea. but the quality of experience is everything. my fingers are crossed.

probably wouldn't work for any twitch-style games (fighting, racing, etc). but for jrpgs and the like (i'm thinking of Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch and Valkyria Chronicles specifically)- it could be great.

I keep forgetting about Sony's acquisition of the Gaikai streaming service, but unless they have some kind of elder god tier networking system I can't see that method being ideal at all. I'm not saying it doesn't work (OnLive isn't all that bad), but I would rather Sony use Gaikai for something more interesting.

#48 Posted by mellotronrules (1250 posts) -

Unless this Gaikai layer is indistinguishable (in quality and latency) from raw gameplay, I have very little interest in using it.

you can pretty much bank on that NOT being the case. there's no way they can account for latency and video compression to such an extent that it feels like you're doing the rendering on your end. the technology just isn't there yet. but if it comes down to a choice between video compression artifacts/slight input lag and no ps3 support at all, i'll take what i can get.

#49 Posted by harinosho (604 posts) -

I don't mind the console not being able to play PS3 games. Once I complete a game, it would be very rare if I ever go back to it, unless its street fighter or something similar (which I own digitally as well, so..yeah.

#50 Posted by mandude (2666 posts) -

C: It doesn't matter to me, because I have a PS3 and TVs are still the same.