Sony on Backwards Compatibility
- Thread starter The Wolf King
- Start date
Agreed, doesn't matter how fast your broadband connection is, you will never EVER get the experience on PS Now or any streaming game service that you will as if you own the game playing in on your own system via disc or DD. I will never pay for that service either.
Lol at his response. He won't admit that MS did it right and Sony's choice is horrible and money driven, but, the "for gamers." AMIRITE?
PS Now is a service and is available on products that aren't video game consoles, I'll never use it and I think it was a waste of money on Sony's part but for some reason they think it was worth it.
Xbox One BC isn't going to be widely available until 2 years after the machine launches, that makes almost no sense. Sure it's a feature to have but the further you get from the console launch the less people really care about it. Hell most people didn't even use it in the last few consoles that had it built in, it's more of a bullet point. Also don't forget that not every game is going to work, they are starting with 100 and that's fine but what if the game you want never makes it to that list? does it really benefit you? I don't care about PS Now or BC on a console, but when there are so many great games already out or coming out soon on the new consoles why would anyone be all that excited to possibly go back and play old games? especially when they can always just keep their old console.
Xbox One BC isn't going to be widely available until 2 years after the machine launches, that makes almost no sense. Sure it's a feature to have but the further you get from the console launch the less people really care about it. Hell most people didn't even use it in the last few consoles that had it built in, it's more of a bullet point. Also don't forget that not every game is going to work, they are starting with 100 and that's fine but what if the game you want never makes it to that list? does it really benefit you? I don't care about PS Now or BC on a console, but when there are so many great games already out or coming out soon on the new consoles why would anyone be all that excited to possibly go back and play old games? especially when they can always just keep their old console.
Oh come on. Its all money driven and it's not like MS isn't also capitalizing on remakes that are suspiciously missing from the small list of available games. Porting from the PS3 to the PS4 is a much bigger technical hurdle than 360 to Xbox One. MS wouldn't be doing this if they didn't need to, not like they are just being nice.
Short sited. The tech will get there at some point.
Last edited:
This is what my monopoly game looks like that I play through out the year and I have had it since I was like 2:
http://www.capetowndailyphoto.com/uploaded_images/monopoly_world_edition_IMG_7213-739925.jpg
and I still go back and play Xbox Original games on my Xbox 360, including Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon Summit Strike for example. Oddly enough, now I can play Xbox 360 games on my Xbox One to multiple devices and streaming over the internet.
There is no spin around it. More options are good for consumers. Look at the benefit it gives gamers. Rainbow Six Siege comes with Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and Rainbows Six Vegas 2 exclusively on Xbox One thanks to BCV. Fallout 4 comes with Fallout 3 exclusively on Xbox One thanks to BC. The console just keeps giving us more value for our money. I am getting Fallout 4, and I never owned Fallout 3. S C O R E. Gamers can sell their 360, make money off of it and get more games. Look at the Xbox Live games with gold value now for Xbox One gamers. They get all the Xbox One games and the Xbox 360 games. That will give some people games they have never played before thanks to BC.
Microsoft said they will be releasing HUNDREDS of titles PER MONTH. Makes sense because all they have to do is have the developer approve, and they flick the switch.
Xbox BC is actually widely available right now to over a million preview members. It will be available to all gold members this fall. They are adding over a hundred more titles this fall as well, and that also includes ALL FIRST PARTY titles.
I think you are the only person I have read a post from on the internet that found a way to spin this into a negative. I know your precious PS console just got boned by this announcement, but it is a benefit for gamers at no additional charge. Just because you are not interested in BC obviously doesn't mean millions of others are. It was on the top of the list of most requested features. I hear this "BC" desire for every single console release.
MS's implementation is far superior. His reasoning is laughable. For the first time this gen, MS has topped Sony in a clear and identifiable way.
1) If I cared about playing PS3/360 games, I would unplug my PS3/360, put it in a box, and stick it, along with all its games, in a closet. Then I could pull it out whenever I felt inspired to play last gen 720p, 30FPS games, THAT I ALREADY PLAYED BEFORE EXACTLY THE AMOUNT I'VE WANTED!!
2) If I didn't care about playing PS3/360 games, I would get rid of my PS3/360, and buy a PS4/XBO.
The impact that this backwards compatibility has now, 2.5 years after the launch of the next gen, has greatly diminished because the public has already agreed to do one of the above two scenarios. It's one thing to launch with backwards compatibility. Obviously, during the first year of a generation, it's always sparse games wise. During the second year it's even less important. WE ARE GOING ON YEAR THREE!!
I realize that there are some people (I threw my PS3/360 out, but I've kept my games) that this appeals to, BUT WHO THE HELL THROWS OUT THEIR CONSOLE AND KEEPS THAT CONSOLES GAMES?!!
2) If I didn't care about playing PS3/360 games, I would get rid of my PS3/360, and buy a PS4/XBO.
The impact that this backwards compatibility has now, 2.5 years after the launch of the next gen, has greatly diminished because the public has already agreed to do one of the above two scenarios. It's one thing to launch with backwards compatibility. Obviously, during the first year of a generation, it's always sparse games wise. During the second year it's even less important. WE ARE GOING ON YEAR THREE!!
I realize that there are some people (I threw my PS3/360 out, but I've kept my games) that this appeals to, BUT WHO THE HELL THROWS OUT THEIR CONSOLE AND KEEPS THAT CONSOLES GAMES?!!
Did it right? 2 years later and only 100 titles? No they did it late and better but not right.
Before you think I am letting Sony off the hook.... PSN Now is TERRIBLY FLAWED
It's the top requested feature for consoles. Looks like millions are excited.
Btw we are not even 2 years into this gen lol. Where did you get 2.5? Try closer to 1.5.
Not surprised Sony fans are downplaying this.
The reason why it's going to be appreciated is because any arcade/digital games you bought on 360 will be tied to your account so you can just re-download anything you've previously purchased online to your X1 library.
It's pretty sweet IMO. There's games people still like to play.
Legit link/s saying in 2015 its still the most requested feature?
Its a bit late is why its getting criticism but better late then never right?
I'm just saying in 2015 not as many care anymore
They did it right. Emulation is not an easy task. PSN Now is a joke for BC. 100 titles is a rather large amount.
Yeah but I've studied humans for a long time. What I've noticed is that people usually play games they buy initially, and then they play them until they get their fill. Then, they move on to their next interest.
Then I've also noticed that when technology makes a big leap (new generation of gaming consoles), it greatly diminishes the value of those older games simply because the presentation looks so poor/archaic compared to new gen games.
And I could understand people who read the above two blurbs and say "Well yes, I'm different though. I want to play my arcade/digital games on the 360". To which I say, "If you wanted to play your 360 arcade digital games, you'd probably still have your 360 plugged in."
It makes no sense. I mean, did you guys see how bad Mass Effect 1 looked during the MS press conference? I just think it appeals to an insanely small, vocal minority.
Facts are not your strong suit, are they? I think you should think a bit more before you post.
True its very hard to emulate last gen with this gen hardware.
PSnow is a non factor/joke.
I think it helps sony more not too, they are already ahead of the game in sales, they can just continue doing remasters/indies and taking their time with new AAA games. They can delay them, whatever they need and they still will have "lineup" that people can play.
It wouldn't make sense with that strategy, they had a ton of ps3 exclusives so people will pay near full price for 1080p versions.
I never claimed any of that was factual. I'm just using common sense.
Take a look at how many people played Evolve the week after it came out. Then look at those numbers today. The player base has diminished around 95%. It's not just Evolve, it's all games not named Minecraft, Dota 2 etc...
Then take into account the fact that BC deals exclusively with last generation games, that look and play much worse than modern games, and you'd have to think that that 95% number from above grows to 99.9% concerning last generation games.
I just don't see any reasonable excitement for this feature. In November 2013, I could barely see it. Today though? Ha.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/ps4?view=condensed&sort=desc
Scroll through those pages for a bit, there's 100 games per page, and tell me if it's tough finding games to play on PS4.
Once again, I can somewhat see the feature being relevant at the launch of the PS4/XBO, but today? f*** no.
You're not using any common sense. You started off your misinformed rant getting the length of the current generation wrong. You make up stuff in your posts and present them as fact, which they rarely are. Slow down, take your time and then post. When you post like you currently are nobody takes anything you say seriously and it's dismissed.
I am the Union's most prolific poster. If I occasionally make errors that are inconsequential to my argument, it's hardly unexpected. People do not "dismiss" me as much as they flock to me. I generate discussion. I extend knowledge to the less informed. I am the Grand Poobah.
(I'm also willing to listen to counter arguments if there's some validity to them. That doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.)
Sure there are lots of games to play, ouya has a ton of games too, that's not my point. If we are just talking about just sheer games, and since indies are super relevant anything can be since they are typically old school visually, then 360 games are relevant. A game you haven't played is still a new game to you, ps4 indie or 360 retail or XBLA.
Didn't the Xbox one's library just increase by like 7x getting 360 games then?
No, Mattrick made a poor gamble and he lost. I would assume that if Phil Spencer was placed in his position a few years earlier, Xbox would be better off. We're also not saying that BC is a bad thing. It's just not exciting or really relevant to 99.9% of gamers.