Sony: Backwards Compatibility Is Never Coming Back

[HEXYDEZiMAL]

I have plenty of friends with a 360. If it were 54%, that means that over half of my friends would have had dead consoles by now. I also used to repair them at a game store, where I assure you again that it's not 54% -- I've never seen anything to justify that percentage that they've reached. You fanboys are also forgetting that in the failure topic, only 4% of the people polled said that they wouldn't get another 360.

System overheats are often relatable to user stupidity most of the time (bad or poor ventilation, too much dust, etc.). The vast majority of my time was spent fixing user-related problems (outside of the PS2). The 360 has had design flaws that have been fixed over time, and the few remaining ones are easy fixes when the console itself isn't under warranty anymore.

Mass Effect is not that great, cleverlymadeup? I have to ask -- what planet do you live on?

I'd also rather have some games that are reverse compatible, instead of no games at all. Blu-Ray is already rivalled by XBOX Live's HD video delivery, and it's safe to say that delivery systems are going to replace hard media almost entirely in the future.

By the way, if you honestly believe that including backwards compatibility would make the system drastically more expensive, I'm going to take this chance to laugh at you. There's just no way. A PC can run an emulator that practically works like a PS2, and that's software. It would be no problem at all for the PS3 -- which Sony has been bragging is the most powerful system -- to run a PS1 or PS2 emulation, especially since it's a safe bet that Sony knows the hardware intimately in comparison to the people who emulate it on the PC.

So sorry, but I don't need to scramble for a reason. The PS3 is shit. Always has been, always will be. Gabe Newell said it blew when it came out, and you see his company isn't at any losses for lack of PS3 interest. It is simply not vital.

Sony was not prepared for its release, and they've made an amazing amount of mistakes and plenty of stupid commentary ever since.

It's also well documented as the hardest and most expensive console to make games for, and they declare that's on purpose. At what point did anybody who's not Sony think that's a good idea for a console that was twice as expensive as its competitors at the beginning?

I'm not really a fanboy, by the way, I'm a realist. Want some more realistic truth? The original XBOX is practically a million times more durable than the PS2, and is capable of so much more when it's modded. Oh, and the PSP is quite possibly the worst decision that Sony's stuck by. The DS not only still kills it utterly, but it's an easily breakable, shoddily made joke in comparison -- I used to repair shattered buttons on those every month. As well, those proprietary UMD discs have always been a crappy, way overpriced format.

 

[GonzoGamer]

This is what I'm talking about: the PS3 is a fun machine and would probably sell better if they sewed shut the mouths of their execs and publicly executed their whole marketing team.

Right at a point where people get excited about buying a cheaper ps3, they have to go say something like this which I'm sure will change a few minds that were considering getting a ps3 now.

While it didn't affect my purchase, I actually know a couple of people who refuse to get a ps3 if it's not going to have BC: why the hell would they say it's never coming? I can understand why they want to say it's not right around the corner or anything (considering the ps2 is their best selling hardware ever) but to say it's never coming is going to turn a few people off altogether.

Now would be the perfect time for MS to lower the price of the 360 and snag the disenfranchised. Then again the people I know who refuse to get a ps3 because of the BC issue, also refuse to get the 360 because they know it can melt itself on their shelf.

Great choices we have this generation huh?

 

[Teh_Doomage]

So, they drop the price. Great...and then take away one reason I would consider getting a PS3 to replace my aging PS2. That's not happening now. They do something nice(price drop), take away any promise of a good feature.

 

[Pendragon9]

It seems to me that nobody here ever gave the ps3 a chance. They just want to complain. I'm willing to bet that even if Sony put in BC, nobody here would consider buying one. They're probably lying if they said they were considering, because it's cool to hate Sony like a bandwagoning sheep. Again, it's fine if you just don't like it and I'm not gonna try and defend a company that's flawed like the others. Just please tell the truth already. Admit you never planned to buy a ps3 and be honest.

 

[Sebenko]

Ahhh, sony. Not winning me back.

If I have a PS3, I'm not going to want to switch my console around when I want to play a PS2 game.

But fear not! My PC can still play games from the last millennium. And from different consoles.
And combine those, and I can play just about any game ever made in the last 30 years or so.

Well, If the PS2 emulator I found wasn't laggy on my usually pretty reliable PC.

 

[hazabaza1]

Lucky I still have my PS2, in case I do get a PS3.

 

[SsLordMagus]

It has been almost 10 years since the Ps2 came out, I don't get why all those people whining about BC don't go out and buy a PS2 if that's what they want to play so much.

I feel that saying i wont buy a X(PS3) because it doesnt play games for Y(PS2) is a bit weak.

X for X, Y for Y

Not only that, it seems that they do not really want a PS3 for what is new in it...

 

[TikiShades]

Bluray - not worth it.

False. The games can hold 5 times more stuff than a regular disc, and the graphics difference is noticeable. It's easy to think there's no difference, but there is a huge one.

 

[Ptrack_Git]

So vearry happy with my BC PS3, playing God of War with texture smothing in wide-screan progresive scan glory. It makes me sad for all those nay-sayers who refused to uprade a year ago.
The way the PS2 emulation works on the system makes me belive that there is an actual pice of hardwhare running it. The controllers shut off and have to be turned back, and realy the whole thing seams to shut off for a milla-second. It dosent do that for the PS1 emulation, wich leads me to belive that A: It actualy costs money to put that feature into the system and B: there will never be downloadable PS2 games or a downloadable PS2 emulator on the PS3. Sorry.
But realy, dose anybody care that the 360 isn't BC, no, then why is it so important that the PS3 is? If it is that important to you (like it is for me) then why didn't you get one befor?
Maybe if more people baguth BC PS3s they would still be making them.
Sony decided people would rather have bigger hard drives and smaller systems... I guesse it makes sense.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

I have plenty of friends with a 360. If it were 54%, that means that over half of my friends would have had dead consoles by now. I also used to repair them at a game store, where I assure you again that it's not 54% -- I've never seen anything to justify that percentage that they've reached. You fanboys are also forgetting that in the failure topic, only 4% of the people polled said that they wouldn't get another 360.

System overheats are often relatable to user stupidity most of the time (bad or poor ventilation, too much dust, etc.). The vast majority of my time was spent fixing user-related problems (outside of the PS2). The 360 has had design flaws that have been fixed over time, and the few remaining ones are easy fixes when the console itself isn't under warranty anymore.

man where do i start about how and where you are wrong

first off, i did a poll that shows there is more than enough evidence to support the 54% thing, it's actually hovering more towards the 77%

secondly due to the way statistics work, your friends can be one of the percentage that hasn't had a failure

thirdly user error cannot account solely for the amount of failures, especially since they've have to redesign the system itself to include better heat sinks, also if you say "there's a design flaw" that discredits your own "user error" argument

Mass Effect is not that great, cleverlymadeup? I have to ask -- what planet do you live on?

i played it and thought it was overly average game

I'd also rather have some games that are reverse compatible, instead of no games at all. Blu-Ray is already rivalled by XBOX Live's HD video delivery, and it's safe to say that delivery systems are going to replace hard media almost entirely in the future.

no hard media will still be around

oh and as for the live hd video thing rivaling, when they decide to pull the plug on videos you "own" what will you do? when you stop subscribing to live, you lose the videos you "own" or when they decide to change the license for them you lose the videos.

however with blu-ray you still have your movies no matter what they decide cause you have the hard copy

By the way, if you honestly believe that including backwards compatibility would make the system drastically more expensive, I'm going to take this chance to laugh at you. There's just no way. A PC can run an emulator that practically works like a PS2, and that's software. It would be no problem at all for the PS3 -- which Sony has been bragging is the most powerful system -- to run a PS1 or PS2 emulation, especially since it's a safe bet that Sony knows the hardware intimately in comparison to the people who emulate it on the PC.

actually this proves how much you don't know, when they were selling with the PS2 built in, they were selling the consoles at a loss, this was public knowledge. they then removed the PS2 chip AND dropped the price AND were making money off the console

so there goes your little theory, with some very public knowledge

So sorry, but I don't need to scramble for a reason. The PS3 is shit. Always has been, always will be. Gabe Newell said it blew when it came out, and you see his company isn't at any losses for lack of PS3 interest. It is simply not vital.

ok Gabe Newell has said ANY system besides m$ has been hard and too difficult to code for, he's an ex-m$ employee and frankly got his start in the video game industry by piggy backing off of The Carmack. so using someone who probly isn't very good at doing any multiplaform programming isn't a good thing.

oh and The Carmack has said the PS3 isn't hard to code for

Sony was not prepared for its release, and they've made an amazing amount of mistakes and plenty of stupid commentary ever since.

really and how well has m$ done for every single thing they've released? yeah they've done even worse than Sony has

It's also well documented as the hardest and most expensive console to make games for, and they declare that's on purpose. At what point did anybody who's not Sony think that's a good idea for a console that was twice as expensive as its competitors at the beginning?

really it's a proven fact? sorry but there's been a lot of other coders, besides Gabe, that have come out saying it's a great system to code for and not very hard at all, including The Carmack who happens to be a proven multiplatform coder

I'm not really a fanboy, by the way, I'm a realist. Want some more realistic truth? The original XBOX is practically a million times more durable than the PS2, and is capable of so much more when it's modded. Oh, and the PSP is quite possibly the worst decision that Sony's stuck by. The DS not only still kills it utterly, but it's an easily breakable, shoddily made joke in comparison -- I used to repair shattered buttons on those every month. As well, those proprietary UMD discs have always been a crappy, way overpriced format.

wow i'm not sure where to begin with the stupid in that statement.

first off the original XBOX can only be greater than the PS2 by modding it, which means it's not better at all and it's not overly durable either, they had TONS of problems with it, such as faulty power adapters, that actually required a recall and had lots of heating issues as well and they had to redesign the controller

secondly the PS2 has it's own linux distro that you can install, you can also make mods for it and it's distributed by Sony themselves, to do that with the XBOX you have to illegally mod your system

thirdly the PSP is actually a great system, just poorly supported as Sony didn't fully know what to do with it, it's also rather hard to break unless you are totally careless with it

as for being a fanboy, yeah you're a fanboy and really have no idea what you're talking about and spout a ton of fanboy rhetoric that is full of half truths and lies

 

[Nerf Ninja]

Bluray - not worth it.

False. The games can hold 5 times more stuff than a regular disc, and the graphics difference is noticeable. It's easy to think there's no difference, but there is a huge one.

I know there's a difference, I just don't see it as being worth it or a major selling point of a boring console. Also I don't have HD eyes so I can't really see much of a difference anyway.

Oh and by the way an opinion is never false.

 

[JaredXE]

You know, I would have to disagree. BC IS a big selling point, because (lets face it) Blu-Ray is useless, and other than a handful of exclusive titles, everything can be done on the 360 (which at least ATTEMPTS to be BC). And no, I am not a 360 fanboy. I just happened to have bought one first because at the time it had more and better games.

But that brings me to my point. WHY should I buy a PS3, when I can get the same games on the 360, play many of my xbox games on it, and I already own a PSOne and PS2. And I don't want to spend $20 more per movie just to see it with a higher pixel count and "neat" pop-up bubbles telling me facts about the movie I am trying to enjoy. Not to mention having to update the firmware just to play new videos, something dvd players don't have to do.

Other than Valkyria Chronicles and inFamous....there really isn't any game on the PS3 that is worth buying it for.

And if you mention Killzone 2 I will scream. No more brown-coloured FPS's!

 

[Slayer942]

Its not exactly better, cus if you read what i said, it's all past tense, sony has already royally screwed over my ass.

 

[MR.Spartacus]

And Sony is officially managed by drunken chimpanzees. So if someone owns a PS2 what reason do they have to buy a PS3 over a 360? Oh and "I got mine!"

On the surface, it appears to be a misstep for Sony until you look at the ongoing sales figures for the PS2. It is still quite alive, folks.

You bring BC back to the PS3 and who would have reasons beyond price to buy a PS2 anymore?

Pure economic decision. Self-preservation, really.

You're right. Why encourage people to purchase your NEWER, costly system you invested ludicrous amounts of capital into at tremendous losses when you can keep milking the cow from the last generation.

This is the other side of the strategy, obviously. They protect their bottom line by selling both consoles.

If Sony included BC in the PS3, that enables people to only buy one unit. They make less. People who want to play both older and newer games will be forced to buy a PS2 and a PS3 (or buy PSN rereleases - but either way $$$ for Sony), while those who want strictly new will buy a PS3 (and either likely have a PS2 already or have no interest in one). Those who want old only will stick to the PS2.

I thought it was so obvious that it didn't need to be stated, but I guess not.

Maybe because they have a competitor? If neither next gen system will play your PS2 games then what does it matter which one you buy? So for example if someone already has a PS2 they won't buy a new one then they purchase a new 360. In conclusion Microsoft get's the money and Sony get's exactly what they've earned.
Edited for better punctuation and tense.

 

[Keshie]

So apart from the root-kits and the failure-by-design and the sheer relentless greed, I've got ANOTHER?? reason not to buy anything from Sony?

Anything new, anyway. At the start of the summer I went to eBay and bought a second hand modded PS2 and a spare laser for ?70 and a pile of thirty PS2 classics for ?300 That's not a cent towards your salary, Koller.

 

[phoenixbeast]

Ok, for those who say that backwards compatibility is useless because you already have a PS2, that isn't the case for everyone...Think about it this way...

You have Gamer Bob...Lets say Bob is just a meager working class gamer who can't afford every new thing that comes out due to a low paying job, and upcoming college expenses/car payments...Now last generation Bob saw all three systems and seriously debated on which one to get because he could only afford to buy one...Bob decided on a System A...Now as time goes on, Bob sees great games come out for the other system (B or C) and even though Bob loves his current one, wonders how nice it would be to play those games...But Bob cannot afford that with his financial status...

Now the new generation, Bob has a choice of systems A2, B2, or C2...He sees system B2 and C2 and thinks with backwards compatibility I can buy this system, and buy old AND new games...But alas!...System B2 has only limited BC and C2 has dropped it all together...Bob then sees that he would have to shell out more money for another system that is several years old...So unless Bob is dying to play those old games, he will not pay money $100 for 4 or 5 old games...

However if system B2 or C2 had full BC, Bob could buy the new system and would have access to the new games, but still be able to pick up the few old games that he wanted as well...

I'm very sorry that was long...And I hope that you actually took the time to read it...I know this isn't everyone's case, but I know a lot of people who actually have this problem...I have more examples of different situations where BC would have made purchasing a system easier, but this post is long enough...Thank you for your time.

 

[Monshroud]

One of my biggest complaints is that over time Sony has been pulling more and more features from the PS3 (not just BC), and up until the slim was asking for the same amount of money.

When Sony was hyping the PS3, they were saying that it was going to be the center of home entertainment and they had the features to back up those claims. The original released versions of the PS3's had:

1> Blu-Ray and DVD Support
2> SACD Support
3> 4 USB Ports
4> Multi-Card Reader
5> Hardware based backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2

They were touting the all-in-one box concept. That meant I could replace multiple pieces of electronics with one box. For someone who has limited space, this was a great concept. Now over the last year or so I have been going through bouts of un-employment so I couldn't buy a PS3. (or any games for my current systems, I am WAY behind on my gaming)

Over time now though, Sony has changed their tune. They are making the PS3 just a game system and movie player, like the PS2. With each iteration of the PS3 they remove more and more from it. Now with the PS3 Slim, at least they have finally dropped the price, but at the cost of all the other features they were touting.

The Slim PS3 has these features:
1> Blu-Ray and DVD Support
2> 2 USB Ports
3> PS1 compatibility (I think, haven't seen reports on that)

I am now only getting 1/2 the machine they advertised. That is what I am upset about.

 

[JaredXE]

I have plenty of friends with a 360. If it were 54%, that means that over half of my friends would have had dead consoles by now. I also used to repair them at a game store, where I assure you again that it's not 54% -- I've never seen anything to justify that percentage that they've reached. You fanboys are also forgetting that in the failure topic, only 4% of the people polled said that they wouldn't get another 360.

System overheats are often relatable to user stupidity most of the time (bad or poor ventilation, too much dust, etc.). The vast majority of my time was spent fixing user-related problems (outside of the PS2). The 360 has had design flaws that have been fixed over time, and the few remaining ones are easy fixes when the console itself isn't under warranty anymore.

man where do i start about how and where you are wrong

first off, i did a poll that shows there is more than enough evidence to support the 54% thing, it's actually hovering more towards the 77%

And where is your poll? Who did you ask for your data? What cross-section of the populace did you hit? Who funds your survey?

Or was this a little internet poll on a single website that can't possibly represent every xbox user?

secondly due to the way statistics work, your friends can be one of the percentage that hasn't had a failure

And 48.2% of statistics are made up on the spot. I have to disagree with the death rate of the 360 in the last couple years. Yeah, the early ones were crap, Microsoft admitted that. But for the past couple years, my machine hasn't broken at all (Elite, extra fan, don't play it for 16 hours straight) and the place I work, which sells and performs repairs on the things hardly sees any pass through which aren't broken due to dumb user.

thirdly user error cannot account solely for the amount of failures, especially since they've have to redesign the system itself to include better heat sinks, also if you say "there's a design flaw" that discredits your own "user error" argument

There WAS a design flaw. It was fixed.

By the way, if you honestly believe that including backwards compatibility would make the system drastically more expensive, I'm going to take this chance to laugh at you. There's just no way. A PC can run an emulator that practically works like a PS2, and that's software. It would be no problem at all for the PS3 -- which Sony has been bragging is the most powerful system -- to run a PS1 or PS2 emulation, especially since it's a safe bet that Sony knows the hardware intimately in comparison to the people who emulate it on the PC.

actually this proves how much you don't know, when they were selling with the PS2 built in, they were selling the consoles at a loss, this was public knowledge. they then removed the PS2 chip AND dropped the price AND were making money off the console

so there goes your little theory, with some very public knowledge

No, they still take a loss per unit, why do you think Sony has been closing factories? PS2 emulation has been software, no real additional cost there, the reason why they have been losing LESS money per unit is because the hardware changes, gets cheaper, gets smaller.

So sorry, but I don't need to scramble for a reason. The PS3 is shit. Always has been, always will be. Gabe Newell said it blew when it came out, and you see his company isn't at any losses for lack of PS3 interest. It is simply not vital.

ok Gabe Newell has said ANY system besides m$ has been hard and too difficult to code for, he's an ex-m$ employee and frankly got his start in the video game industry by piggy backing off of The Carmack. so using someone who probly isn't very good at doing any multiplaform programming isn't a good thing.

oh and The Carmack has said the PS3 isn't hard to code for...see the upcoming Rage. Lets see, he has said that the PS3 version will lag behind the 360 due to it's limitations in coding and that the PS4 is more likely to come out first.

Sony was not prepared for its release, and they've made an amazing amount of mistakes and plenty of stupid commentary ever since.

and how well has m$ done for every single thing they've released? yeah they've done even worse than Sony has

You know, I am getting the sneaking suspicion with all the m$ signs you throw around, you might not like Microsoft.....

It's also well documented as the hardest and most expensive console to make games for, and they declare that's on purpose. At what point did anybody who's not Sony think that's a good idea for a console that was twice as expensive as its competitors at the beginning?

it's a proven fact? sorry but there's been a lot of other coders, besides Gabe, that have come out saying it's a great system to code for and not very hard at all, including The Carmack who happens to be a proven multiplatform coder

But...it...is...a....proven...fact....SONY HAS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED THAT IT MADE IT HARDER TO CODE ON PURPOSE!

As for THE Carmack, again, he has stated that it's harder to get his game right on the PS3 compared to the 360.

I'm not really a fanboy, by the way, I'm a realist. Want some more realistic truth? The original XBOX is practically a million times more durable than the PS2, and is capable of so much more when it's modded. Oh, and the PSP is quite possibly the worst decision that Sony's stuck by. The DS not only still kills it utterly, but it's an easily breakable, shoddily made joke in comparison -- I used to repair shattered buttons on those every month. As well, those proprietary UMD discs have always been a crappy, way overpriced format.

not sure where to begin with the stupid in that statement.

first off the original XBOX can only be greater than the PS2 by modding it(OPINION), which means it's not better at all and it's not overly durable either, they had TONS of problems with it, such as faulty power adapters, that actually required a recall and had lots of heating issues as well and they had to redesign the controller

*Checks his xbox* Yup, same model I bought a couple months after release, no problems there. And the redesign was so the controller could fit in the tiny japanese hands and the hands of those who hadn't hit puberty yet. I personally prefered the bigger controller, since it fit my hands more, and the button config was better.

as for being a fanboy, yeah you're a fanboy and really have no idea what you're talking about and spout a ton of fanboy rhetoric that is full of half truths and lies

Thank you pot, you really told that kettle off.

 

[FinalHeart95]

A shame, but I can understand why they're leaving out BC. Doesn't make it any less frustrating though.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Every other company is guilty of this as well. Yet nobody calls Microsoft on it for example. Proves how ignorant anti sony people are.

Probably because people liked Sony. They liked their products. They just dont want to be DICTATED to by a company whose business is to SELL US STUFF. WE are the consumers. WE should be dictating our needs or we WALK with OUR money. The CUSTOMER is always right. Business has forgotten that.

Secondly, nobody calls Microsoft on it because I think we can all agree that the xbox library was NOTHING compared to the PS2 library of games. You're talking about the largest and best library of games on the market period... many of which are STILL very very RELEVANT. We arent talking about Super Nintendo 16-bit classics here, Sony is STILL selling the PS2 like gangbusters because the system and the games are still close enough to this generation that the games are still better than most of anything on the current system. For every PS3 game you can name that is a "must have" I can list 5 PS2 games that STILL blow the doors off that game. Microsoft didnt have that extensive library of awesomeness, and did make BC for MOST of their decent or top-rated games. It's not as big of a hit to them because almost all of their best titles made the BC list. There isn't an Xbox out there that can't play Halo or Halo 2. Sony can't make that same claim.

Worse, sure they can still make money by selling PS2's cheap. Except apparently they are sending mixed messages: they want people to buy the PS3 and PS3 games, but they keep pushing those people towards their much cheaper alternative the PS2, which effects PS3 sales.

But if Sony is content with people buying a $50+ PS2 while their $300 PS3's they are STILL taking losses on sits collecting dust on shelves because customers are more frugal with their money in this recession economy, then fine.
Just don't expect people to do cartwheels over it.