PlayStation 4 Abandons Backwards Compatibility

[Anchupom]

Well, I think it's bullshit. The only reason I have a PS3 is because of it's backwards compatibility (I got one on release, I call her Mother).

This has basically put me back into the market to get an XBox because regardless of which system I choose, I'll have to keep my PS3. Poor choice, Sony. Poor. Choice.
Kinda hoping that Microsoft are going to release backwards compatibility for whatever their next console will be, just to rub it in Sony's face.

 

[dragongit]

Well, I think it's bullshit. The only reason I have a PS3 is because of it's backwards compatibility (I got one on release, I call her Mother).

This has basically put me back into the market to get an XBox because regardless of which system I choose, I'll have to keep my PS3. Poor choice, Sony. Poor. Choice.
Kinda hoping that Microsoft are going to release backwards compatibility for whatever their next console will be, just to rub it in Sony's face.

The Xbox next may be not as backwards compatable as the PS4. The 360 clearly wasn't. It had a "selection" of games at launch. hardly a fraction of it's full library. Switching over would prove noting and wouldn't save you any more or less money.

I have a fat PS3 as well, but I never used it to play my PS2 games. I still had a PS2. Yes it sucks, but the alternative could cost us an extra hundred dollars in hardware to play PS3 games because Sony decided to use a different, more functional graphic's card then what they tried previously. They simply do not code well together and would cost Sony time and money to either tack on a mini PS3 inside, or develope emulation software for a later date. Regardless you may not be able to read your disc. HOpefully Sony will come up with something, that will allow those who had bought games previously, to keep their purchase. maybe read the disc and launch the streaming version instead of the disc, at least proving your perchase.

 

[Rad Party God]

If the release of the PS4 means the PS3 is somehow lowered in price, then skipping an entire generation would certainly be worth it.

Or I could simply stick to PC this entire "new" generation.

 

[TilMorrow]

The more I hear about the PS4, the more I think that it's all promises and dreams that are going to come crashing down. It's all well and good that they say that the console is going to be such and such and do everything under the sun but without actually showing it's features off and missing out features such as backwards comp then I can't help but feel it's going to struggle like the PS3 did at the start and the Vita currently is. Additionally with the developers, like Bungie, who have shown off clips of their new games for the PS4 also mentioning that they are developing them for the PS3 then it seems sensible to just stick with the previous console for the first few years rather than go for the PS4 as there doesn't seem to be much incentive for it.

 

[cricket chirps]

Shall we count how many times Sony can shoot themselves in the foot in one press conference?
-No backwords compatibility
-No access to PSN games you own on the "Playstation Network"(Apperantly that only applies to PS3)
-No huge game announcements yet to even entice people to even want a PS4

Looks like im holding onto my PS3

 

[Epona]

If my PC can emulate the PS2, this powerful gaming console can do it as well. Of course, it can also emulate the PS1 as well.

I understand needing the streaming option for PS3/PSN games but forcing us to be online to play PS1 and PS2 games seems silly.

BTW, the Vita is backward compatible with PSP games and some PS1 games.

 

[zidine100]

completely understandable the overhead for backwards comparability for the ps2 and 3 are well huge, that and the fact they will probably try to resell the games to you.

 

[Colt47]

As much as I love backwards compatibility, there are limitations to older architecture that can make it difficult for developers to create games on them. I would have jumped on the bandwagon with not buying because of lack of backwards compatibility if Sony didn't pull a rather interesting twist in picking up x86 CISC architecture. This is actually better than backwards compatibility for a number of reasons, one of them being lower development costs since they wont have to freaking rewrite entire code blocks just to make a game work on CELL architecture when they already have it made for x86.

 

[klaynexas3]

What about PS1 games? That's not hard to play, and to this day not a single Sony console hasn't been without a way to play them. Will someone tell me what will happen to that library of games?

I'm in no way surprised about it not playing PS3 games, as that would require a lot more work to do so, thus jacking prices, and making shit far too expensive to the point where the console can't sell at all. I'm more interested in where it is going, not if it can do something that one of my consoles can already do just fine. I'm only interested in the PS1 capabilities because, well, as I said, not a single Sony console so far is incapable of playing those games in some way shape or form, so that's a bit more of shaky ground, as no one seems interested to explain what might happen with that. At any rate, I enjoyed the announcement, like what I see for the PS4, but in terms of PR, it was stupid, and only lead to more questions than it truly answered. Either wait until E3 to show everything at once, or show us most of everything(including the damn console you bastards) and a price point while holding the actual games for E3, or just blow off E3 and tell everyone they got their early peepshow and deal with it. At the end of the day, no surprises about this "news"(if you could even call it that), but I'm still excited(although agitated at the same time) for what else we will get to see in the future, and what the console will actually have to offer.

 

[CriticalMiss]

Yeah, I'm pretty much done with this console generation. The PS4 was really the only thing I was interested in, since I refuse to buy Microsoft's next console. If I do get one, it won't be until many years down the road and after a price drop.

The lack of backwards compatibility on its own is pretty bad, but not being allowed to keep your games you bought on PSN? Yeah both those things combined are a major deal breaker for me.

But at least we have useless social media features shoved in where we don't need them.

Don't forget the Sony Kinect that everyone was asking for.

I wouldn't be suprised if the PS4 is just as slow to sell as Sony's other latest hardware. They keep on ruining their chances of it being good with each passing moment. I can't wait to hear how much it is going to cost. Given the current trends it must be somewhere around $2000 to make sure even the most hardcore Sony fans lose interest.

 

[Smolderin]

Something tells me that Sony doesn't want my money....

I mean, come on. Really?

 

[elilupe]

This is...just...goddamnit Sony. If we never get a single console that can play every game ever made (which is pretty much impossible, I'd say), backwards compatibility is the only thing keeping older games in existence. Game companies can't seriously expect people to own every console ever, just to play some older, great game.
Imagine, if you will, that you want to watch Casablanca, a cinematic classic, and the only way to do that was to but an old, black and white, CRT TV with dials.
If that was the case, that movie would disappear, no matter how great of a classic it was. That is what is going to happen in the future unless we get some damn backwards compatibility.

 

[MrTub]

No shit sherlock.

PS4 will use x86.

 

[gyroscopeboy]

Whelp, there goes my only fleeting interest in the PS4. I've been an xbox owner for a looong time and the only way i'd switch would be if I could play the huge backlog of PS3 exclusives as well.

 

[The Eupho Guy_v1legacy]

This doesn't bother me that much. Its a new architecture, so there were most likely to be compatibility issues (Which people would have bitched about if Sony tried for BC). So I guess that means I'll keep my PS3 around and buy a <a href=http://www.jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=AC1691>HDMI switch when I eventually get a PS4, so I can play one or the other without cable changing.

 

[Durrsly]

Sony: Remember those "PS3 has no games" jokes. Well we made it a reality with the PS4.

 

[RicoADF]

If Sony releases it without backwards compatibility people will ***** about that.

If Sony had released the PS4 with backwards compatibility it would have raised the price and people would ***** about that.

You just can't win with those kinds of people. I'm aware we still don't know how much the PS4 will cost but building PS3 hardware into it would not be free.

Option 3: offer a version without backwards comparability for cheap and one with for more, then customers have a choice.

 

[Lucky Godzilla]

Something tells me that Sony doesn't want my money....

I mean, come on. Really?

It may have to do with the fact that they abandoned the cell architecture in favor of x86.
We can all agree that despite it's potential, the cell processor did end up holding the PS3 back due to its complexity. By electing to use the x86 architecture, Sony can cut down on development costs, and blur the lines between console and pc development further. Essentially they would have to run a ps3 emulator on the ps4, a feat that is impossible for top of the line computers.

Sucks I know, but I don't think it should be classified as shameless moneygrabbing.

 

[rapidoud]

Yeah, no.
They have no excuse not to have a ps2 software emulator with all the processing power that thing has.
But then again, why have that out of the box on day 1 and give me an actual reason to consider getting that thing to finally replace my ps2.

Maybe they want you to use the PS2 emulator on your computer...