Obviously, this is about the recently announced factoid that the PS4 will not be backwards compatible with PS3 game discs. A lot of people are crying foul, but they don't really understand why. The reason is purely technological. The PS3 contained a powerful computer chip called The Cell.
No, not that Cell. It's a computer chip, not a movie. Stay with me, thanks. So, the new powerhouse of the PS4 is the QWX64KP12.-742WTFKTHXBAI. Extremely powerful chip with a completely different architecture than Jeniffer Lopez... I mean, the Cell. So, unfortunately, the PS4 simply isn't wired to play PS3 games, even though it's far more powerful. This would explain why Sony is trying to stream them to the PS4 instead. If PS3 games are being processed on Sony's servers, then all they need to do is stream them to you, and the PS4 can handle the rest. It's a clever alternative, but not really a desirable one. Not everyone has high speed internet, and some people have data caps. For those unfortunate SOUUUUUUUUUUUUUULS... *ahem* ... they're going to be hit hard when they try to stream PS3 games.
Now, let's address a common statement that I've been seeing in these discussions.
"LIKE ZOMG JUST KEEP J00 PS3 PWOBLM SOLVED N00B!"
Except, there are still problems. Let's try to understand first why some people are disapointed that there's no BC. Sony was the first company that made a backwards compatible gaming machine (technically, it was Nintendo since you could play regular Game Boy games on a Game Boy Color, but I can't really count that as the GBC wasn't entirely a new machine). The PS2 was able to play PS1 games, and it continued to play PS1 games throughout its life cycle. This set an expectation and other companies followed suit. Nintendo's Game Boy Advance was fully backwards compatible with GB and GBC games, the DS could play GBA games and the 3DS could play DS games. When the Nintendo Wii came out, it could play GameCube games, and the Wii U could play Wii games. The 360 even played old Xbox games, but that was a hot mess as they had to do it through software emulation and ceased support on that less than a year after its release. Surprise, surprise. You now started seeing Xbox games available for download...
Sony upheld the tradition of backwards compatiblity with their first generation of PS3s, not only allowing you to play PS2 games, but most PS1 titles as well. In essence, the PS3 launched with the largest library of games in console history as it supported not one but two other systems' entire libraries. That is great for a gamer's first foray with a company's system. Unfortunately, Sony was hemorraging money from the PS3 just being too bloody (I c wut I did thar) expensive, so they started scaling things down with the following generations of PS3s. Sadly, the Emotion Engine (PS2 graphics chip) had to go, but at least Sony tried to keep PS2 BC with emulation support. That didn't last long, and eventually the new PS3s were relegated to nothing more than machines that only played PS3 games. Sony started BC, and have now swiftly ended it.
Sony has limited the size of their PlayStation library now. Yes, Sony states that they will include PS1 and PS2 titles along with the PS3 titles for their cloud gaming service, but this comes at the expense of manhours, resources and money to get those title available, not to mention the service will most assuredly not be free. Want that rare niche PS1 title that no one's heard of? I doubt Sony will make that available digitally. You'll have to go to eBay or wherabouts to acquire it. Prepare to buy a PS1 or PS2 to go with it, or pull out your old console and dust it off.
"That means I got to hook up another console to my TV!"
Yeah, I know. It sounds lazy, but having another console out means having to make space. It means snaking more cords through entertainment centers. It means pulling out controllers with cords, and means more tripping hazards. The convenience afforded to us thanks to Sony and BC meant that we could retire our systems and save space. It meant that our old systems that served us well could finally be put to rest, no longer counting the days when the CD/DVD motor or lense would finally crap out. PS4 being BC with PS3 also would have meant a lot to owners of 20 and 60 gig PS3s, again because they could retire their original PS3s before the inevitable Yellow Light of Death (I got mine last year in September. R.I.P.) and if they've been playing them hard, they've put more than six years of wear and tear on them. Also, if the PS4 was BC, it would mean a lot of PS3 owners could trade in their machines towards the PS4, making it more affordable for them, thus selling more PS4s.
True, the PS4 is technically incapable of playing older games. True, we could just keep our old systems lying around. True, we buy new machines to play new games. It seems silly that some would be upset over an incovenience of having to buy an older machine or hooking up another machine to a TV to play older games, yet it was Sony who introduced us to that convenience for us in the first place. That's why seeing people bothered by no BC. They'll buy those PS4s for PS4 games, but they have every right to be disappointed. It's hard not seeing such a terrific feature that's been with the PlayStation for two generations suddenly disappear. I guess we're all just going to have to settle paying for a streaming service with a limited selection, provided our internet is fast enough and we haven't hit our data caps yet...
"LIKE ZOMG JUST KEEP J00 PS3 PWOBLM SOLVED N00B!"
Saying it like an idiot doesn't make it any less true. But heck, I still have my old consoles, still have my old games and never even play them. The whole BC thing is largely just typical gamer belly aching, because *sigh* being a gamer is so tough.
Oh and I don't know if you are trying to pursue writing as a career but this was a real ham-fisted article. You may want to tighten up your style a little.
1 Like I have like 20 ps3 games. If my system breaks, and I have a ps4, I will still need a ps3 to play games I've downloaded as well as disc. But my new pc let me take all of my steam and blizzard games that I've purchased over the years, and re download them for my new pc. Seems like Sony is going backwards...
1 Like very simple. Most of the top games can be played multiple times at various levels. Trying to attain 100% trophies takes time and gives many hours of enjoyment. Who wants to throw such games away. Not me. BC is a must. Perhaps Sony could stream games free or at a discount to individuals who have purchased the disc. That would suit me. PS3 will eventually break and not be replaceable so PS4 should have BC.
1 Like Well, BC isn't that important in my opinion. If you want play old games, buy the old console. Don't sell it. Or play all the old console's games before buying the new one... I'll do that with my Xbox. I have around 15 or so games to finish with and I'll only buy a new console when I'm done. Simple as that.
BC is one of those thing everyone asks for but no one really uses when they have it. That's why it was dropped after the first gen of PS3s. Statistically, it's not really something people actually take advantage of.
Sure, once I bought my PS3 I put my PS2 into storage & it was a hassle to get out but who cares? Those games are old, now I had new games to play! Skip to the current gen - it sort of makes sense for Sony because this encourages PS4 owners to continue buying new games. That's just good business.
As for the cost argument - if people can trade in their old console, they'll get more sales - it works the other way too. The reason Sony cut the Emotion chip from the PS3 after the first gen is because it was costly. If they offered a different SKU of the PS4 with BC, how much extra would you be willing to pay for it? $100? $200?
Let's face it, you buy a console because you want an affordable gaming device that is simple & hassle-free. If you want more features & a huge back catalog, get a pc. You'll probably be able to play your rare niche PS1 title through an emulator if that's what you're really looking for.
3 Like People bitch and bitch they want next gen consoles, then they bitch they can't play old games. Then don't buy it. Problem solved.
2 Like Yes Backwards compatability is important. Not everyone wants to stack 50 consoles in their house nor do they want to have to repurchases games they already owned. Ok maybe not the discs but why can't PS4 owners stream all their PS3 downloads to the PS4? Seriously. That can't be that hard. There's a lot of games where they only way to play them is on their original console format due to liscencing issues like all those great old Disney Capcom games. One day you're going to be missing an old title and have no way to play it other than trying to dig up an old console and a working copy of the title. Good luck with that.
http://www.screwattack.com/shows/partners/game-overthinker/game-overthinker-overbytes-playstation-4
Is is disappointing? Very.
Is it a reason to throw your toys out the pram and renounce Sony as the devil incarnate, vowing never again to touch another system beginning with the letters 'PS' in an award-winning, ground-shaking hissy fit?
Of course not.
Let's try and retain a little perspective, people.
1 Like Well, why don't they made the BC optional, if a gamer wants one they need to pay more, this way they can't force a expensive product on consumers that don't have the previous generation, and those who have can pay a little more and have what they wish.
Well Sony, you don't care about your fans and followers..... shame on you. I hope they will announce a BC later, when is closer to the launch date. Or not?
This makes me sad because I love Sony, I started with Sony. Now I might be forced to migrate to Microsoft....
Well, at least we still be able to buy used games.
2 Like Here's how I look at it: There are only a handful of PS3 titles that I would want to go back and play. Once great games start to be released for the PS4, I will rarely go back and play the great games for the PS3. I have multiple TV's in my home, and I don't mind dedicating my small 32" to my PS3. People need to stop being spoiled, and just deal with the situation. I do understand, however, if you use your PS3 to purchase the PS4. But if your complaint is just hooking it up and making room....then...no offense, but, that's some lazy ass shyt.
@Doddie I think the demographic that Sony is primarily catering to are people that make enough money who can afford more than one TV in the home.
You say not everyone can afford multiple TV's and consoles. You are correct, but that is most likely the minority of current gen gamers. Also, you mean to tell me that the same people that can't afford these luxuries, can however, afford to purchase a system costing between $400-$500 and games costing $60? I wasn't trying to toot my own horn in my previous post, I just thought I was part of the majority.
1 Like @Doddie I don't discount anything you just said, and I commend you on your charity. But if that is truly your argument, then BC doesn't matter either way. If someone is having financial issues, buying a brand new PS4 should be out of the question in the first place.
Whether I'm part of the majority or not, I am the customer base that Sony is marketing to. And Sony isn't in business to do any favors for people that are in financial straits. If I can afford to purchase the PS4 on day one, then I should be able to afford more than one TV to hook up my PS3.
@SkamArtist Sorry, but the USA has gone through a very tough time. Many people are unemployed with chilcren who had the consoles before the downturn. Also, PS3 can be acquired 2nd hand very cheap, as well, I give mine away to children in need. I do not believe you are in the majority, sorry.
I love the idea of BC, but the way I see it I paid $600 (well spent!) for the privilege last time around while a lot of other gamers held off and complained about the price. Meanwhile Microsoft demonstrated that gamers would rather buy a featureless base system that required overpriced peripherals to work. So, the gamers choose the future.
Who knows? Maybe they'll be BC in threes. They'll release a new BC PS3 called "PS Trilogy," and in 15 years we'll all be buying "PS: Parts IV-VI."
3 Like By keeping BC out of the PS4, it will only lower the price and after what happened with PS3s launch, can you blame them?
2 Like @david_lck I'm fairly sure the PC architecture of the new CPU will also make future BC a non-issue as long as all future consoles continue having that kind of architecture. The problem with the Cell was that it was VERY custom, so developers had to assemble their engines specifically with that processor in mind. Now the processor will be very similar to current gen PC CPUs and hopefully the Xbox CPU, at least in terms of programming.
1 Like @david_lck I really wonder just how much more expensive BC made the PS3. I'm sure the bulk of the cost came from the Blu-Ray...
@JustPlainLucas @david_lck A Blu-Ray midia is more expensive than a DVD midia, however the real cheap part is that a Blu-Ray can whistand far more data, and a large amount of layers(in which DVD only withstand a second layer the DVD9) and its only a little more expensive than a DVD9( a single layered one), a multi-layered BD can is a bit more expensive than a single layered one, while the DVD to DVD9 is over the double of the price, so if well used a BD more(and cheaper) useful than a DVD9, something that they didn't do properly this generation.
Thanks man now that I understand the tech behind I can shallow this sadly bitter pill. JustPlainLucas
Nintendo or Sony weren't the first to do backwards compatibility. Atari were the first to build a backwards compatible console, the Atari 7800 could play 2600 games. I feel BC is a really important aspect of consoles today. I don't use the feature myself, as I keep the consoles I own, but many people will want to sell their PS3 to fund the purchase of the PS4, but they may want to keep their PS3 games. But if they can't play them they'll pretty much be useless. My gripe is that if you want to play your PS3 collection on your PS4 you may (probably will) have to purchase them again. This is crap. Why should anyone be forced to pay for games they already own just to play them on a new console (if only there was some way to prove to Sony the games you already own, so then you could get them again at no charge)? And as you say, data limits and poor internet connections will affect people. In truth I can see the whole streaming aspect of the PS4 sinking like the Titanic. No way can it work as well as Sony want it to.
@Devils-DIVISION Some people like to sell their old consoles to buy new ones. If they didn't they may not even have the cash to buy the new one otherwise.
1 Like Trading in your console would at best give you $150 of credit - if you're complaining about that when you'll [likely] be forking out close to AU$900, I daresay you weren't in the position to be purchasing one to begin with.
"PS4 will not be backwards compatible with PS3 game discs". Not PS3 discs, but PS3 games, on disc or downloaded.
1 Like Just have a strong launch line-up and no one will play their old games aside from times they're just feeling nostalgic.
@SergioMX There's still a group of gamers who still have a lot of games from earlier in this generation that they haven't gotten around to playing yet.
@JustPlainLucas @SergioMX Then why be in a rush to get the PS4...? Finish them, THEN buy a PS4, simple as that. You wouldn't be playing PS4 titles if you're busy still getting to "alot of games" from previous generations you haven't finished.
4 Like @JustPlainLucas @SergioMX I don't see why you wouldn't keep your PS3 if you have a big backlog of games. Just like when I get bored of my PS3, I boot up my PS2, it's not that big of a deal to keep a console in storage until it's needed. BC seems to be a hot topic for like 6 months to a year until the line up of next gen games is strong. Then it is not as significant and only for the minority of users. It is as simple as this, if you want to keep playing your OLDER games, then keep the OLDER system, that's guaranteed. This is completely new architecture and a completely different system. BC is just the cherry on top but not necessary.
@SergioMX @JustPlainLucas Except maybe they want to play a mix of old and new. There's a lot of factors that could affect when someone wants to play an old game. Maybe a new title in a long running franchise is coming out on the PS4, and they've yet to even start the franchise on the PS2, so they want to play catch up before it comes out. Maybe people have a backlog of games, and a PS4 lull is happening, so they now have time to play the old ones. Maybe they just got in the mood to start that long forgotten gem they picked up at a yard sale. Who knows? But it's never as "simple as that." \
1 Like "I guess we're all just going to have to settle paying for a streaming service with a limited selection." I'll settle for keeping my PS3 and not upgrading to the PS4.
1 Like Ya, no backward compatibility seems like a big fumble to me. Even if there are work-arounds, they won't work for everyone. As a simple example, I only have 3 digital sound ports on my receiver, and I'm not going to pull my whole cabinet apart to swap cables every time I want to play a game. Plus selling old system = cash for new system/new games. And ya, bandwidth limitations are an issue for many.
It seems like a big Achilles heal to me, especially given that the next xbox will surely be backwards compatible as the hardware will based on DX11 and an evolution of the 360's PC-like hardware, plus thanks to it's OS division, MS has extensive experience with backwards compatibility.
I still like what the PS4 brings, and I think the game streaming might give it some big advantages, but it's also not a solution for everyone...yet.
"the next xbox will surely be backwards compatible as the hardware will based on DX11 and an evolution of the 360's PC-like hardware"
No it's not. Microsoft is using an AMD CPU (possibly an APU) this time around. Xenon was a Power-based IBM processor. So if you're expecting backwards compatibility, prepare to be disappointed.
@rarson @mike300zxt The 360 runs on a modified windows NT kernel. The NT kernel can run on RISC Power PC and x86 hardware. The old graphics card was amd, and so is the new one. The old Xbox used DirectX, and so will the new one. The hardware and software are similar enough that supporting 360 Apis on the new hardware should be easy enought. And if it isn't, Microsoft also has hardware virtualization software they could use to provide an emulated 360 hardware platform on the next Xbox. Although I'll bet they can do it without the virtualization since it will still run a modified windows kernel.
1 Like I understand the argument for streaming when it comes to PS3 BC, but I really don't understand why Sony plans on using streaming for PS1 and PS2 titles. Any servers used for streaming PS1/PS2 games will probably use software emulators running on x86 processors, unless Sony plans on having servers with 10-20 year old chips built in. The PS4 has a perfectly powerful x86 processor--why not just use that to run the emulator, and let users download PS1/PS2 titles?
Game streaming is useful for playing demanding games with low-performance hardware. It's pointless when playing low-demand games with high-performance hardware that could run it just fine by itself. Unless Sony's servers will actually have the archaic hardware of the PS1 and PS2 built-in, I don't see why software emulation on a server would be preferable to software emulation on the console itself.
@Funkyhamster Good point, emulating and streaming from the server would appear to very difficult especially with the Cell processor. Unless they ported every game they would have to emulate for each client. That would take some power. Might be missing something here so if anyone wants to chip in feel free.
I'm more concerned about the shitload of arcade/full games I have bought on my 360 that will disappear in the ether after the next gen comes out. (i think PS owners have the same problem)
@jeffrobinThey said at the sony conference that the PSN titles you bought won't be availabe on the PS4 but they want to find a solution to that. So basically games are lost with the console, ergo if you had a big library of games from the PSN they'll be as useless as games from Steam you can't download to a new rig
@ilantis @jeffrobin Whut? I built a new pc last year & migrated all my Steam games.
That does suck if you invested a lot in d/l titles on the PS3, but it's a new box that runs on a new architecture so I guess you'll just have to keep the old box around. I can't put cassettes into my car CD player either...
"they aren't changing architecture like Sony"
Yes, they are. They're using an x86 AMD chip, like Sony.
@ilantis @jeffrobin Oh ok. I was coming from an Xbox owners point of view. I really hope MS doesn't make me buy those games again, they aren't changing architecture like Sony so they shouldn't have to but you never know.
Does Steam do that? Bastards!
I don't want to do the cable dance with the console and TV just to play my old arcade games. Easy win there Microsoft if you make it happen..
