Reply
Last Guardian
Registered: 04/18/2007
Offline
11299 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

Icestar10 wrote:

Jdurg wrote:

Sorry, but that is financially stupid.


Also, I seriously hope you weren’t calling me stupid. We can have discussions without insulting. Smiley Happy


He did not call you stupid. He said it's financially stupid to add BC when the cost and loss far outweigh what profit would be brought in. He's saying that if Sony did it, Sony would be stupid.

Message 71 of 112 (115 Views)
Umbrella Scientist
Registered: 12/08/2008
Offline
12347 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

PapaWarlock wrote:

Icestar10 wrote:

Bulletpainpills wrote:

I'm sure Sony would have added Backwards Compatibility if it as easy. If Sony was against BC afterIt's they dropped PS2 BC in the PS3 then why does the Vita have PSP BC? If Sony truly hated the idea of BC then it makes no sense that the Vita would have PSP BC.  The fact that Vita does have PSP BC means creating an emulator for the PSP wasn't that hard at all, unlike with the PS4 where creating an universal emulator for PS3 games would be incredibly difficult due to the complexity of the Cell Processor.


It's not Sony who seems to be against the concept of backwards compatibility, rather it seems like the Sony fanboys are against it. 


It's not that the "Sony fanboys" are against BC, it that most of us understand economics. Most everyone that I've seen who tell other posters to "get over it", "keep your PS 3" and so forth are not against backwards compatability. Most of them would love to have a BC PS 4 that would play PS 3 games and maybe even PS 2 games as well. It's easy to dismiss us as fanatics, zealots, idiots or stupid. However a basic business economics class would teach people the dangers inherent in making products far too costly than the market can bear.

 

I can guarentee you that if Sony added BC to the PS 4 then the overall cost of the PS 4 would be far higher than the community at large would be willing to support. Imagine if Sony announced yet again that their console is $500 (let's use the very low end range of price possibilities). With all the rampage and nostril flaring from psychos when the price was revealed for the PS 3, I sure wouldn't want to be in Sony's shoes when the internet and consumers went on a 2nd rampage over price.

 

Yes, there are hundreds of thousands of gamers who would be more than willing to pay another $100 - $300 or so for a BC PS 4. But the bulk of the consumer base will balk yet again. The first two to three years of a console's life is generally sold at a loss. There is no profit to be made on the consoles until around the 2nd or 3rd year. So add into that the extra cost of adding BC compatability, and it's not a pretty picture. Even if Sony offered 2 models, one for those who want it and one for those that don't, it is not financially feasible to add BC to the system. They would lose far too much money to continue in the console business. Don't about you, but I don't want to be stuck choosing between only Microsoft and Nintendo. I really don't want to be reliant on MS for a console at all.

 

Adding BC to the PS Vita wasn't that difficult since it was done via software emulation. PS 2 emulation for the PS 3 was hardware. When they changed the formula from the original hardware emulation to a software/hardware mixture, there was a loss of compatibility. Fewer games were supported and more glitches appeared in older games.

 

Sony's aquisition of Gaikai Cloud, and the subsequent announcement of streaming PS 1, 2 and 3 games via the Cloud shows their determination to try to make some kind of BC available to the consumer. Hopefully we'll learn more at E 3.


Well the PS2 classics on PSn are apparently software emulated.  So its not impossible but probably takes a bit of time for each game.

 

I dont get why PS3 games can run on Vita and PS3, and many on PSP but they will not be playable on PS4?

You may have an argument on the cell but Vita has no cell, PSP has no cell, why cant these games and all the PSN games which are playable on Vita/PSP be supported on the PS4?  I dont get this at all.

 

 

Na13-31 wrote:
Finally, the structure of my question is that you would have to disprove every possible outcome to be correct and I would just have to have one that would likely be beneficial. That's statistically in my favor by quite a bit.


some_text
Message 72 of 112 (113 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Umbrella Scientist
Registered: 12/08/2008
Offline
12347 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

[ Edited ]
Apr 25, 2013

PapaWarlock wrote:

fantasyplayer wrote:

If sony looses 20% more in the next years, on top of the 30% drop in gaming for the last 4 or 5 years gaming will not servive the fallout. Sony will have lost the battle. People are pulling away from gaming in the last little while. They need a wow affect to pull people away from other eletronics that is moving faster than gaming is. Taking away something that might make more sell is not a good way to make it better. Like I say, they should have thought of this the first day they started development of ps4. It is a little late now though.


It's not the fact they might sell a few more units, it is the fact that adding it will cost far more than they can possibly recoup. Every console is sold at a loss to begin with. No matter how many people buy it they will still lose money. Adding BC will deepen the price loss, again no matter how many units are sold, it's still a loss for them.

 

Sony makes the bulk of it's money in the first few years of a console's life through software sales. License fees they get when a company sells a game on Sony's system.  Even with what they make in licensing fees and software sales is not enough to recoup that loss. Why add more to your loss margins than you can possibly recoup? The idea is to break even or make a little profit. It is not fiscally responsible.

 

 


The reason they sell a console at a loss is to get a large install base, then as you say make money off the software sales and subscriptions.

 

There is no way they want to sell as few consoles as possible to reduce loss or anything like that, they want/need to sell lots of consoles and fast.

 

If they sell less consoles they will never sell enough software to a very small install base.

 

I get what you are trying to say but it cant be this way, by that logic they would want to sell as few consoles as possible if selling lots of consoles was a bad thing.

 

The bigger the install base the better they realise the debt they are aquiring will not last long, regardless of initial costs.  Stock holders can be given the numbers and know the money will look after tiself soon enough, its the reverse that makes problems.

 

Lets say the max consoles Sony could sell before going bankrupt was 1000, no developers would make any games for this system, share holders would see this console as being not popular and a bad investment, software sales would be limited to that 1000 people, etc.  Sony would go bankrupt anyway.

 

Lets take the opposite side, Sony sells 150 million consoles the first year and aquires 15 billion dollars of debt, every developer and his dog would fight and probably pay huge fees to make games for this console, investers would see it as one of the most popular device ever created and throw huge sums of moeny at it like rice at a wedding, Sony's shares would go up, everyone would make tons of money, the software sales and subscriptions and advertising would easily take care of the debt in no time.

 

Now if Sony would start selling used games they would dominate the world.

 

Or did you mean something else and I misunderstood you?

 

cheers.

Na13-31 wrote:
Finally, the structure of my question is that you would have to disprove every possible outcome to be correct and I would just have to have one that would likely be beneficial. That's statistically in my favor by quite a bit.


some_text
Message 73 of 112 (113 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Last Guardian
Registered: 04/18/2007
Offline
11299 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

Icestar10 wrote:

PapaWarlock wrote:

It's not that the "Sony fanboys" are against BC, it that most of us understand economics. Most everyone that I've seen who tell other posters to "get over it", "keep your PS 3" and so forth are not against backwards compatability. Most of them would love to have a BC PS 4 that would play PS 3 games and maybe even PS 2 games as well. It's easy to dismiss us as fanatics, zealots, idiots or stupid. However a basic business economics class would teach people the dangers inherent in making products far too costly than the market can bear.

 

 


Don't worry, I am not dissmissing anyone as being stupid or anything like that! Smiley Happy I am not mad at Sony for not including backwards compatibility because I can understand. I am happy though that they are making some effort by buying Giakai. Smiley Happy


The comment I made was more of a generalization. Many of the pro-BC crowd do just that. Not everyone in the pro-BC crowd does so. Just like not everyone who speaks up against BC have a brain either. There are some rather indifferent people in both groups, whose sole point seems to be to rile up the other side.

 

Didn't mean to imply that's what you were doing, although sometimes your responses come off that way. Just like I'm sure sometimes my responses come off as rather dismissive to someone on the other side.

Message 74 of 112 (111 Views)
Fender Bender
Registered: 11/10/2006
Offline
2785 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

PapaWarlock wrote:

Icestar10 wrote:

PapaWarlock wrote:

It's not that the "Sony fanboys" are against BC, it that most of us understand economics. Most everyone that I've seen who tell other posters to "get over it", "keep your PS 3" and so forth are not against backwards compatability. Most of them would love to have a BC PS 4 that would play PS 3 games and maybe even PS 2 games as well. It's easy to dismiss us as fanatics, zealots, idiots or stupid. However a basic business economics class would teach people the dangers inherent in making products far too costly than the market can bear.

 

 


Don't worry, I am not dissmissing anyone as being stupid or anything like that! Smiley Happy I am not mad at Sony for not including backwards compatibility because I can understand. I am happy though that they are making some effort by buying Giakai. Smiley Happy


The comment I made was more of a generalization. Many of the pro-BC crowd do just that. Not everyone in the pro-BC crowd does so. Just like not everyone who speaks up against BC have a brain either. There are some rather indifferent people in both groups, whose sole point seems to be to rile up the other side.

 

Didn't mean to imply that's what you were doing, although sometimes your responses come off that way. Just like I'm sure sometimes my responses come off as rather dismissive to someone on the other side.


I apologize if my post came off that way. It was not my intention. Smiley Happy

 

Message 75 of 112 (109 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Last Guardian
Registered: 04/18/2007
Offline
11299 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

Phillyblunz wrote:

Well the PS2 classics on PSn are apparently software emulated.  So its not impossible but probably takes a bit of time for each game.

 

I dont get why PS3 games can run on Vita and PS3, and many on PSP but they will not be playable on PS4?

You may have an argument on the cell but Vita has no cell, PSP has no cell, why cant these games and all the PSN games which are playable on Vita/PSP be supported on the PS4?  I dont get this at all.

 

 


Very few PS 3 games are playable on the Vita. As far as I know even if a PS 3 game is digital and supports remote play, you can't download that PS 3 game onto your PS Vita to play it that way. Remote play is a different concept than actually emulating the game play. There are some PSN games that are playable on both PS 3 and PS Vita but there are coding differences that allow that to happen. 

 

I'm not sure but I think you have Remote Play confused with actually playing the game using the Vita's hardware. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding something in what you're saying.

Message 76 of 112 (115 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Umbrella Scientist
Registered: 12/08/2008
Offline
12347 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

PapaWarlock wrote:

Phillyblunz wrote:

Well the PS2 classics on PSn are apparently software emulated.  So its not impossible but probably takes a bit of time for each game.

 

I dont get why PS3 games can run on Vita and PS3, and many on PSP but they will not be playable on PS4?

You may have an argument on the cell but Vita has no cell, PSP has no cell, why cant these games and all the PSN games which are playable on Vita/PSP be supported on the PS4?  I dont get this at all.

 

 


Very few PS 3 games are playable on the Vita. As far as I know even if a PS 3 game is digital and supports remote play, you can't download that PS 3 game onto your PS Vita to play it that way. Remote play is a different concept than actually emulating the game play. There are some PSN games that are playable on both PS 3 and PS Vita but there are coding differences that allow that to happen. 

 

I'm not sure but I think you have Remote Play confused with actually playing the game using the Vita's hardware. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding something in what you're saying.


No I understand remote play very well, it was probably the single biggest dissapointment about the PS3 for me.  Only one of my disc based games ever worked, LAIR.  (And it worked awesome)

 

I'm talking about games where you buy the PS3 version and get the Vita version for free, they are cross play titles, you can continue your game on the Vita when you leave the house and resume on PS3 when you get home again.

 

So basically my point was these are PS3 quality games that should have no problems what-so-ever running on a PS4.

 

Same with any Vita game out there should be playable on SP4, same with any PSP or PS1 game on PSN.

 

So yeah if the lack of BC on PS4 spans all the previous systems that makes no sense, some PS2 and PS3 games I can understand not having BC right away for of course.

Na13-31 wrote:
Finally, the structure of my question is that you would have to disprove every possible outcome to be correct and I would just have to have one that would likely be beneficial. That's statistically in my favor by quite a bit.


some_text
Message 77 of 112 (112 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 11/10/2006
Offline
2785 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

I wonder if PS2 emulation is possible or not. What do you all think?

Message 78 of 112 (110 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 07/23/2012
Offline
19 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

I totally agree with you! A system advancement or upgrade should be able to play anything that came just before it, just like my Blu-Ray player being able to play DVD's and CDs!

Why throw out the baby with the bathwater?

I intend to get the PS4 when it comes out, but like you, I'm not happy about this incompaibility issue.

Message 79 of 112 (105 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Last Guardian
Registered: 04/18/2007
Offline
11299 posts
 

Re: ps4 backwards compatibility

Apr 25, 2013

Phillyblunz wrote:

 

I'm talking about games where you buy the PS3 version and get the Vita version for free, they are cross play titles, you can continue your game on the Vita when you leave the house and resume on PS3 when you get home again.

 

So basically my point was these are PS3 quality games that should have no problems what-so-ever running on a PS4.

 

Same with any Vita game out there should be playable on SP4, same with any PSP or PS1 game on PSN.

 

So yeah if the lack of BC on PS4 spans all the previous systems that makes no sense, some PS2 and PS3 games I can understand not having BC right away for of course.


With cross buy games, the Vita versions are coded specifically to work on the Vita. The save data is probably a different aspect. That's something I'm not entirely sure about. All I know is that you wouldn't be able to download the Vita version of a PS 3 game onto the PS 3 and play it on the PS 3.

 

The PS 4 won't be able to play Vita games either. I'm not a software person, but I would presume that theoretically you could code a software program to run on the PS 4 that would emulate the PS Vita software, same with the PSP, but why on Earth would you do that?

 

On 2nd thought I probably don't want to know the answer to that. No offense, but I simply see no point to putting the handheld games on a home console. It destroys the point to have a portable system. If they do that, then why even b other having a PS Vita? Just chuck the whole thing in the trash and just make games on the home consoles.

 

It would make the Vita's detractors happy at any rate.

Message 80 of 112 (105 Views)
Reply
0 Likes