Why the PS4 Doesn't Do PS3 Games

[The_Echo]

I'm not sure how I feel about the article implying backwards compatibility was the end-all-be-all of brand loyalty. As if there aren't other (more significant) reasons for someone to stick with a console.

It's nice to have, yes. But it seriously isn't that important.

 

[xpacerx]

I must have been the only one who heard when they said backwards compatibility for ps3 games was handled through the cloud.

They're looking at it - but promising nothing. They explicitly said they weren't guaranteeing anything about back compat and that it would not be present at launch (in an event with some other pretty wild promises).

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see some re-releases further down the road like they do with the PS classics, or even some PS3 games through streaming, just don't expect that you will ever be able to play any old PS3 disk you have sitting around.

They specifically mentioned the ps3 library is something they are focusing on bringing to the cloud and stated the network would release functionality in stages, its pretty much going to happen.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Meh its not that hard to do it via OSD and hardware layer(IE have most of the PS3 hardware there), sure it would cost more but you'd still be able to offer a new console that can play every PS brand game for under 500$. I'd rather have that than a 300$ POS of which we are getting and streaming BWC? How cute its not BWC since you are reburying the game in a different format...... If you want to go i this anti consumer and crap filled direction $ony then sell the damn hardware that only really palys new games for 100$ it would sell more than the WIIU if you did that.....

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I must have been the only one who heard when they said backwards compatibility for ps3 games was handled through the cloud.

They're looking at it - but promising nothing. They explicitly said they weren't guaranteeing anything about back compat and that it would not be present at launch (in an event with some other pretty wild promises).

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see some re-releases further down the road like they do with the PS classics, or even some PS3 games through streaming, just don't expect that you will ever be able to play any old PS3 disk you have sitting around.

They specifically mentioned the ps3 library is something they are focusing on bringing to the cloud and stated the network would release functionality in stages, its pretty much going to happen.

As long as you rebuy every game you own.

 

[Therumancer]

Well, my basic attitude here is very simple. If they can't solve the problem, they shouldn't be releasing a new generation of hardware yet. The way the problem sounds is that it would be very difficult to work out emulation, but not entirely impossible. Difficult is something I expect them to handle with open arms when a company has gotten this kind of investment of time, effort, and money from me, and other gamers, in terms of a library.

To be honest while it's interesting to look at the problem, and how big it might be, at the end of the day I think the issue is simply that Sony has no motivation or desire to solve it. Given consumer behavior, they probably, and quite rightfully, think people will just buy the new product, which not only saves them the development time, but also allows them to exploit the existing pattern of consumers being will to pay again to buy copies of their old games when they are adapted to the new system. With the way a lot of games have been being ported to the PC and other systems like the X-box it would be relatively simple to work from that code as opposed to the Cell code in a worst case scenario. Looking at the people buying PSone classics, PS-2 games ported onto the PSP or made availible for digital downloads, and
everything else to create backwards compadibility would effectively close them off from exploiting this market.

In short, I get it's a big problem, but not an insurmountable one, nothing like this is with proper motivation. I just think that the motivation doesn't exist, so I stand by my basic attitudes about the PS-4 so far. Truthfully though I have not put down my foot in saying "I won't get it" simply because what console I wind up eventually going for is going to in part be dependant on what the competition does. Sony being a bunch of greedy jerks, doesn't mean that Microsoft won't be an even bigger group of greedy jerks for example.

 

[DTWolfwood]

You know it doesn't hurt to just have a PS4 and PS3 both hooked up at the same time. If you have a HDTV, you'll have enough HDMI ports to support the two. With the PS3 you have DVD player, PS4 can be your new Blu-ray player.

You'll literally have 4 cables, 2 HDMI and 2 Power cables...

This isnt the 90s or early 2000s where everything had 8579128364 cables (Aux, VGA, components, etc.) coming out of every piece of hardware hooked up to a CRT TV.

The trade in to get the new console for cheaper is a common practice, but if you have to do that, you shouldn't be buying a new console. (Its a luxury item you broke *******.)

 

[Sgt Pepper]

"I'm currently debating between the PS4 or moving to the PC gamer world. PC's are a bit daunting to get into though."

They are really not that bad. I have been a PC gamer for quite some time, grew up on the snes, and psx. Things with newer PCs are far more friendly for a person used to console gaming then ever before. I find it amazing that with games like the new Fallouts and Skyrim, my old "budget build" PC with an el-cheapo midrange video card still manages to eat my PS3 alive in terms of graphics and responsiveness (not to mention no 20min Loading times). You can now pretty much treat your PC as a console like I do. Plug in an HDMI cord to your TV or AV-Box, plug in a ps3 or xbox controller and you are all set, you will never know the difference (Aside from missing a few old pals, Jaggy and Pixie)

Indeed. Heck, these days if you buy a game through Steam or a boxed game that runs through Steam (such as Skyrim) you don't even have the hassle of patching like the old days, Steam can handle it all for you.

I was very much into consoles until I got my first PC ten years ago, now PC all the way. The main thing is the upfront cost for a PC tends to be more than a console but PC games tend to be cheaper so, over time, it balances out a bit imo.

 

[Pink Apocalypse]

I lol'd hard at 'fire hazard lurking behind the t.v.'.

Next-console purchases are strongly-oriented on backwards compatibility for this household, which contains 3 X Xbox 360s, and 2 X Playstation 2 (still used). Everyone passed on the PS3. If the PS4 ends up compatible with PS2 games? Maybe.

 

[Fox334]

Well, my basic attitude here is very simple. If they can't solve the problem, they shouldn't be releasing a new generation of hardware yet. The way the problem sounds is that it would be very difficult to work out emulation, but not entirely impossible. Difficult is something I expect them to handle with open arms when a company has gotten this kind of investment of time, effort, and money from me, and other gamers, in terms of a library.

To be honest while it's interesting to look at the problem, and how big it might be, at the end of the day I think the issue is simply that Sony has no motivation or desire to solve it. Given consumer behavior, they probably, and quite rightfully, think people will just buy the new product, which not only saves them the development time, but also allows them to exploit the existing pattern of consumers being will to pay again to buy copies of their old games when they are adapted to the new system. With the way a lot of games have been being ported to the PC and other systems like the X-box it would be relatively simple to work from that code as opposed to the Cell code in a worst case scenario. Looking at the people buying PSone classics, PS-2 games ported onto the PSP or made availible for digital downloads, and
everything else to create backwards compadibility would effectively close them off from exploiting this market.

In short, I get it's a big problem, but not an insurmountable one, nothing like this is with proper motivation. I just think that the motivation doesn't exist, so I stand by my basic attitudes about the PS-4 so far. Truthfully though I have not put down my foot in saying "I won't get it" simply because what console I wind up eventually going for is going to in part be dependant on what the competition does. Sony being a bunch of greedy jerks, doesn't mean that Microsoft won't be an even bigger group of greedy jerks for example.

I'm going to go on a limb and say that you don't know all that much about computer hardware and programming. What you are saying is, and I am going to use a technical term, insane.

If Sony wanted to maintain backwards compatibility they pretty much had to use the Cell architecture for the PS4. Problem is, that creates more problems than it solves. Cell didn't really catch on outside of a few specialized areas (and even then). While pretty much every programmer has experience with PPC (GameCube, Wii, Wii U, XBOX 360, old Macs, some *nix servers) or x86 / x64 / x86-64 (XBOX, PCs, newer Macs, a lot of the *nix boxes) you'll be hard pressed to find anyone with experience with Cell unless you are looking specifically at people that worked on PS3 tools.

The architecture is expensive, not as produced as x86/x64, everything is hard to port from any other platform, its hard to find qualified personnel. There was no reason for Sony to keep the Cell processor, and frankly, they shouldn't have used it on the PS3 in the first place. The architecture has potential, but it isn't something that ought to be used on home machines now: the cost benefit analysis just makes it completely insane.

Clearly, Sony should use a CPU other than Cell for the PS4. The problem here is that there is no way of emulating the PS3 on current (affordable) hardware, and that will likely be true for five to ten years, if not more. And even then, developing a PS3 emulator will require a considerable amount of time due to how different from everything else the Cell architecture is.

Essentially, it was either this, another PS3-style debacle of a console or waiting nearly a decade while Microsoft passes you by. As much as I am no fan of Sony, they made the right call.

I lol'd hard at 'fire hazard lurking behind the t.v.'.

Next-console purchases are strongly-oriented on backwards compatibility for this household, which contains 3 X Xbox 360s, and 2 X Playstation 2 (still used). Everyone passed on the PS3. If the PS4 ends up compatible with PS2 games? Maybe.

If what you care about is BC, PC is your only good bet.

 

[Atmos Duality]

The only reason the PS3 has received as many exclusives as it has, is that after the PS3 became more affordable, it could finally flex its muscle over the 360, now that everyone knows how it was financially viable.

Sony went into the post-PS2 generation under the assumption that they were going to eventually beat Microsoft, and absolutely crush Nintendo; forcing them out of the hardware business. They were going to seize command of the market, and people would play it THEIR way.
An amazing amount of planning went into proprietary tech and DRM for the PS3 and the redesigned PSP, in anticipation of this.

They felt they had such confidence that they didn't even spend their time developing a console that could fully capitalize on one of the greatest game libraries in console history.

Sony went in headstrong and extreme arrogant in their position (I remember their press conferences leading up to the PS3's launch..holy shit was that embarassing) and then...the PS3 failed to dominate either.
It not only failed, it fell into last place for a solid 3 years.

And yet, it's in the lead again (narrowly) by virtue that the Wii and 360 are out of gas. It didn't help that multi-platform launches were quite common for this generation.
I don't think the loss of compatibility with PS3 exclusives are as big a factor for the PS4 as the loss of PS2 exclusives were for the PS3.

Though going forward, I have no idea why they didn't bother strapping the Emotion Engine chip to the PS4; they cannot possibly cost all that much now (being as old as my high school graphing calculator).

 

[matrix3509]

"Lolz just keep your old console."

Yeah I guarantee there won't be a single functioning 360 in the entire world in 10 years time.

 

[Vault101]

I dont see what the big deal is

backward compatibility is convinient, and does help keep your PS3 libary relevant...but in the end all it is is a nice extra

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

If Sony wanted to maintain backwards compatibility they pretty much had to use the Cell architecture for the PS4. Problem is, that creates more problems than it solves. Cell didn't really catch on outside of a few specialized areas (and even then). While pretty much every programmer has experience with PPC (GameCube, Wii, Wii U, XBOX 360, old Macs, some *nix servers) or x86 / x64 / x86-64 (XBOX, PCs, newer Macs, a lot of the *nix boxes) you'll be hard pressed to find anyone with experience with Cell unless you are looking specifically at people that worked on PS3 tools.

The architecture is expensive, not as produced as x86/x64, everything is hard to port from any other platform, its hard to find qualified personnel. There was no reason for Sony to keep the Cell processor, and frankly, they shouldn't have used it on the PS3 in the first place. The architecture has potential, but it isn't something that ought to be used on home machines now: the cost benefit analysis just makes it completely insane.

Clearly, Sony should use a CPU other than Cell for the PS4. The problem here is that there is no way of emulating the PS3 on current (affordable) hardware, and that will likely be true for five to ten years, if not more. And even then, developing a PS3 emulator will require a considerable amount of time due to how different from everything else the Cell architecture is.

The PS3 is a 'Cell' Processor, and as such, if I'm allowed to simplify things a bit, it's just yet another very special RISC/PPC odd one out. It's meant to be different. It's meant to be the anti-PC. It's a half-billion stillbirth turd. To my best knowledge, Toshiba abandoned the idea of putting it in 'every' TV, Sony now follows Apple into more standardized and greener CPU pastures and IBM is still... doing whatever it is IBM is doing. The IBM Roadrunner is an impressive little - partly Cell-powered - beast but, alas, it's yet another 'one-of-a-kind'. So... farewell to Cell in the consumer market, methinks.

The PS4 would probably have less trouble emulating XBOX360/Xenon code. Then again, we're still playing around with that notion. Fun idea, no?

At the moment, we're still scrounging for possibly useful gear. I like the idea of a dedicated PS3 tower with 10TB storage and my whole PS3 collection on it - plus all PS2 and PSX titles, complete with scanline emulation and proper video filters that take the edge off that crap hat pixel perfection of our huge ass expensive LCD panels. PSX emulation on PS3 was... underwhelming, to say the least. And it had no soul, Emotion Engine or not.

In a perfect world, in a free world, Sony would allow for OtherOS/Linux and hardware hacking for the PS3 to go on after they go PS - so people actually had a proper incentive to go buy more PS3 units to, well, run PS3 games directly from 7200rpm hard drives. If you've ever seen that happen, you know what I am talking about.

It's absolutely possible to emulate the Cell and anything running on it. It's just not quite worth the hassle to do it for but a chosen few or even rare or unique freak machines. The PS3 Linux devkits aren't exactly finger-licking good powerhouses. And Intel 64 platforms would absolutely croak low level emulating the PS3.

Plus Sony WILL shut anything and everything down in no time. Seeing as how anæmic the PS3 is fitted hardware-wise besides that Cell abomination, there are really only three issues, in growing order of headache-inducing butthurt:

1) 'Cell' processor asshattery
2) DRM, encryption > decryption 'security' overhead
3) legal issues, DMCA, hungry hungry lawyers

So... now we're about to all be members of the splendid x86/x64/Intel 64 master race family, the sky's going to be the limit, right? No. I think the encryption shenanigans will only properly take off with this next 'Next Gen' console generation. Let's wait and see.

 

[DragonWright]

So their strategy of having a better, but harder to use processor system failed, and they can't run their old games on their new, developer-friendly console. Or something.

M'kay, pardon if this seems like a stupid question, but could they include the old processors just to play PS3 games, or have them as some optional plug-in?

 

[alphamalet]

M'kay, pardon if this seems like a stupid question, but could they include the old processors just to play PS3 games, or have them as some optional plug-in?

They could, but it wouldn't be in their best interests. A reasonable pricing point will sell consoles far better than backwards compatibility would, and the hardware needed to achieve native backwards compatibility would raise the price of the PS4 a considerably amount. This is evident in the sales of the PS3; most of the PS3 units sold were done once the price of the system was cut, and removing backwards compatibility helped cut the price of the PS3 with the introduction of the slim. Not to mention that high-level industry executives have gone on record stating that a "very small percentage of people" even use the feature.

It's inconvenient, but it's a move Sony must make to try and rectify their poor strategy from last gen.

 

[AuronFtw]

"WOULD" be a nightmare? Have you LOOKED at a PS2 emulator. Shit eats up resources.

Honestly, any semi-recent PC can run a ps2 emulator at full gas. No games lag anymore unless your PC is from like 2006. If the next gen console is on par with PC technology today (and it seems to be a bit ahead, actually, at least for now) it would have zero problems whatsoever even running freeware emulators like pcsx2. If Sony actually spent some time and effort making an emulator, it would probably be even more efficient/less resource guzzling.

Hardware is not holding emulation back anymore - PS2 is over a decade old now. PCs caught up with it in recent years, and consoles 2 gens past it should have no problems at all.

 

[SpAc3man]

Even PS2 emulators are a lot of work to get working. PCSX2 is nothing short of a programming masterpiece when you understand how hard it can be to get all the time critical functionality of the PS2 working on another architecture.
From what I understand about PS2 emulation is it's most reliant on a high clock speed on one or two cores. Lower clocks don't work too well even with many cores. Sony would have to start from near scratch just to cater to a dead market. If you want to play PS2 games you should use your PC.

 

[Ryan Minns]

You can be sure as hell MS will jump on this if they have BC

 

[FloodOne]

"Lolz just keep your old console."

Yeah I guarantee there won't be a single functioning 360 in the entire world in 10 years time.

No, but in 10 years time, nearly any halfway decent PC will be able to emulate any game from the 360/ps3 generation.

Hold on to your discs after your 360 dies, download an emulator and play on.

 

[RevRaptor]

Sony do seem to like shooting themselves in the foot. To be honest the ps4 backwards compatibility thing isn't that big a deal but I'm pretty sure I'll never buy Sony again.

I have a ps2 and I love it dearly but the ps3 was a mess.
first it was backwards compatible but it was kinda shit then they removed it entirely, at least Microsoft gave it a really good try even if they did fail.
Then there was the whole linux thing. Yea way to betray your user base there Sony.
The psp go was the last straw for me. It really couldn't get any more insulting than that.

Sony as a company is in major trouble, doesn?t take much searching to see how bad they need the Ps4 to take off. when this happened to Sega I was willing to gamble and bought a Dreamcast anyways (a decision I still don?t regret, bloody love that thing)

Looking at how poor the Ps3 did I feel I was right to not get it and I see no reason to think the ps4 will fair any better. For me at least it feels too much like betting on the slow horse.