Support NeoGAF

[Theonik]

Naturally, I'm using a broadbrush definition of BC to mean "any solution that grants gamers access to legacy games", as that's the ultimate goal. Clearly, there's no emulation based BC on PS4, however, PS Now is currently the only other way of playing PS3 games on PS4 outside of remasters. Yes it's a paid service, as opposed to selling of individual remastered titles, but that's tangential to the point. The point is, that PS Now provides PS4 gamers with a way to play PS3 games and equally, it will provide PS5 gamers a way to play PS4 games. The rest is just semantics.

What I'm saying is, as far as Sony is concerned, it's not about offering players a way to play PS3 games. PS Now is a means and an end in and in itself. Sony is offering PS Now games to Sony Bravia customers, PS4, Xperia, and now PC, as a way of accessing that platform.

 

[Lorul2]

Just wondering?! How is PSnow a good substitute for backward compatibility. if you have to pay for it. Especially if I already own the game?

 

[Shin]

Clearly, the business case is there, otherwise PS Now wouldn't exist. But it does....soooooo...

Or it's a bad business purchase and they are stuck with it until they make back profit, Dave Perry already left Sony as well.
It costed them 250,000,000 I believe, whether it's worth continuing or not only they know.
I've yet to hear anything good about the service, people's opinion can hurt it's growth and therefor hurt PlayStation brand as well.
They'd be better off selling Gaikai if they can find a buyer instead of selling their shares in M3 to Goldman Sachs.
Even if they know how to run their business they as a company have made lots, can't help but think this is one of them.

If it gets the job done then great, which is bringing in more players into the PlayStation eco-system in the end I reckon.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

What I'm saying is, as far as Sony is concerned, it's not about offering players a way to play PS3 games. PS Now is a means and an end in and in itself. Sony is offering PS Now games to Sony Bravia customers, PS4, Xperia, and now PC, as a way of accessing that platform.

PS Now is a form of BC, for PS4 players. I never claimed it was only about BC, however, given it's library until recently (when PS4 games started appearing) it pretty much was about allowing access to legacy Sony games (on which platform isn't relevant). So yes, I get what you're saying, but again it's tangential to the point I was responding to.

Just wondering?! How is PSnow a good substitute for backward compatibility. if you have to pay for it. Especially if I already own the game?

No one is saying it is. Just that it exists as a form of providing access to legacy titles, and will continue to do so on PS5.... anyway this is quickly getting OT.

Or it's a bad business purchase and they are stuck with it until they make back profit, Dave Perry already left Sony as well.
It costed them 250,000,000 I believe, whether it's worth continuing or not only they know.
I've yet to hear anything good about the service, people's opinion can hurt it's growth and therefor hurt PlayStation brand as well.
They'd be better off selling Gaikai if they can find a buyer instead of selling their shares in M3 to Goldman Sachs.
Even if they know how to run their business they as a company have made lots, can't help but think this is one of them.

If it gets the job done then great, which is bringing in more players into the PlayStation eco-system in the end I reckon.

I won't argue about the value of the purchase, because probably the most valuable part of Sony's Gaikai purchase was actually the patents. I don't even think Sony expected the service to blow up, since the traditional local-computing based computing approach has shown no sign of slowing down, despite much pundit commentary to the contrary. At the same time, the traditional approach is of course Sony's bread and butter, and so I'm sure they're not splitting hairs that more gamers aren't moving away from buying expensive Sony-branded gaming hardware to buy and play games in the cloud.

The streaming client-based approach could still be the future of videogames (maybe... lol) and if anything, with Gaikai (PS Now) Sony has both the service and the technology patents to be well positioned in that arena.

If anything I'd argue that Gaikai was the very smart move for Sony to make, even in terms of just protecting their home console "bread-and-butter" business from competing streaming services. With Gaikai's patents in Sony's hands and On-live basically dead, very few companies are going to be eager to move into that space going forwards, especially because Sony already such a monstrous gaming brand in Playstation, tied to the technology required to offer a viable streaming service to consumers.

 

[Diablohead]

Every time I see this thread title all I can think of is "but PS4 pro is the mid step" because that's how it feels to me.

 

[RedSwirl]

The funny part is in the software to build games. PC games use abstract APIs to make sure they work on different types of GPUs from different vendors on many different CPUs.
And consoles don't have that level of abstraction - you can optimize for the given hardware in terms of cache misses, latency, GPU raw commands, intrinsincs, everything that you can rely on on a console because of fixed hardware but you can't on PC (well, technically you can, but who will optimize code for so many variables).

Well... except Microsoft using DirectX for Xbox games, which is probably helping it prepare for its attempt at a unified platform.

I'm actually reminded here of a problem I face with some GoG installs. Take Sin for example. Even though i'm still using windows, and simular PC tech to what I used back when it first released, the game required a ton of tweaks to get running.

The problem? Modern PC's are so much faster then what the engine was built for that it causes mass shuttering issues, as my pc processes stuff faster then the game can spit it out. I actually had to frame limit it to keep that from happening.

On the console BC side, i'm reminded of MvC 1. If you used the fast loading option on the ps2 to play it, all the music was super sped up. The game was written for a certain disc speed for it's music, which it streams off the disk.

Isn't the whole point of GOG getting older games to run fine on modern PCs? And the thing with PlayStation is why the fast disc loading mode is an option and not automatic. Sony knew problems like that would arise and it's why boost mode in the PS4 Pro was an option it added later.

The virtualized environment that XB1 utilises with it's three OS layers are a good start towards getting BC working earlier on next-gen, but their low level programmers will face all the same problems as Sony in terms of getting an emulation solution ready that afford all or most legacy games running at full speed.

The thing is though, Microsoft seems to be currently pinning the whole Xbox brand on the idea of having a single contiguous library of games that carries through all its machines. I think whenever it does put out an Xbox that's a "real next-gen," it's going to try to have that backwards compatibility at launch, and even allow older games to run better on the new hardware.

If any console manufacturer is going for that mobile-like goal though, it's probably gonna require some sacrifice in terms of what they can do for future hardware in order to maintain legacy software support. It's just a matter of how important legacy software support is. That's the weird thing about console video games -- they're the one area of computing where legacy software support isn't a high priority. It's a high priority in personal computing and it's a high priority in the mobile world, but not consoles.

 

[Negotiator]

The funny part is in the software to build games. PC games use abstract APIs to make sure they work on different types of GPUs from different vendors on many different CPUs.
And consoles don't have that level of abstraction - you can optimize for the given hardware in terms of cache misses, latency, GPU raw commands, intrinsincs, everything that you can rely on on a console because of fixed hardware but you can't on PC (well, technically you can, but who will optimize code for so many variables).

What about low-level APIs (DX12, Mantle, Vulkan etc.) though? Can they potentially compromise BC?

Microsoft have managed BC this gen because they bought a company that emulated PowerPC on X86.

Source?

Microsoft doesn't seem to be involved.

The virtualized environment that XB1 utilises with it's three OS layers are a good start towards getting BC working earlier on next-gen, but their low level programmers will face all the same problems as Sony in terms of getting an emulation solution ready that afford all or most legacy games running at full speed.

Didn't Sony also use a hypervisor and virtualization on the PS3 (GameOS/OtherOS)?

I wonder if they had a similar plan to offer PS3 BC with Cell 2 and it got scrapped later on (IBM abandoned Cell R&D because of GPGPU progress)...

What I'm saying is, as far as Sony is concerned, it's not about offering players a way to play PS3 games. PS Now is a means and an end in and in itself. Sony is offering PS Now games to Sony Bravia customers, PS4, Xperia, and now PC, as a way of accessing that platform.

Not anymore. Sounds like they downsized the service. Peculiar to say the least.

 

[Shin]

If anything I'd argue that Gaikai was the very smart move for Sony to make, even in terms of just protecting their home console "bread-and-butter" business from competing streaming services. With Gaikai's patents in Sony's hands and On-live basically dead, very few companies are going to be eager to move into that space going forwards, especially because Sony already such a monstrous gaming brand in Playstation, tied to the technology required to offer a viable streaming service to consumers.

They bought out OnLive because of the patents so yeah in that sense they doubled down on this idea of streaming games.
On that note they seem to be pushing the service more, some kind of notification docked on PS4 and some mandatory question when signing up for 5.0 firmware BETA test.
Then there's the whole PS4 games that recently came to the service, it's not for me but there are a lot of curious birds out there wishing to experience x and z game but don't have a PS4.

As for the whole backward compatibility thing, if it's not there on day one that's fine as long as it is though.
I'd prefer they take their time and implement a proper solution (games running at higher resolution and all that good shit) instead of rush and release it at launch.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

They bought out OnLive because of the patents so yeah in that sense they doubled down on this idea of streaming games.
On that note they seem to be pushing the service more, some kind of notification docked on PS4 and some mandatory question when signing up for 5.0 firmware BETA test.
Then there's the whole PS4 games that recently came to the service, it's not for me but there are a lot of curious birds out there wishing to experience x and z game but don't have a PS4.

As for the whole backward compatibility thing, if it's not there on day one that's fine as long as it is though.
I'd prefer they take their time and implement a proper solution (games running at higher resolution and all that good shit) instead of rush and release it at launch.

You're right on On-Live. I forgot about that.

And I agree totally on your BC point.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Didn't Sony also use a hypervisor and virtualization on the PS3 (GameOS/OtherOS)?

I wonder if they had a similar plan to offer PS3 BC with Cell 2 and it got scrapped later on (IBM abandoned Cell R&D because of GPGPU progress)...

You may be right. I wasn't sure if it was exactly the same, since PS3 developers with GameOS seemed to have lower level access to the PS3 hardware than XB1 devs (at least at the beginning of this gen).

That was my understanding. I may be wrong, however.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Business is booming for ASML with the rush towards 7nm EUV and lower, they just got another order for 8 additional EUV-machines.
One company ordered 6 out of the 8 machines (NXE: 3400B) of which it will use to manufacture processors as well as memory chips.
That machine also passes the light requirement for 5nm production, I believe Samsung ordered the 6, in total 27 machines were ordered.

The take away here is that everything seems to be on schedule, so 7nm EUV should be available for mass production by 2020 if PS5 launches then.
I wonder if they'll go with the same designer as the PS4 or a different one, his new role is at Sony itself not Sony Computer Interactive Inc., thoughts?
His website and works for those interested: https://www.tetsusumiiworks.com/

You know what I'm going to do now, Shin! I'm going to be the no fun allowed guy and disagree.

Looking at very recent history these CPU/GPUs rarely come at the time these foundries claim years before. One of their favourite phrases is they are on track for [insert date].

Let's look at Polaris and Zen:

Taped out in 2015? and launched to customers in mid 2016 (low volumes?) and March 2017 (low volumes?)

From reading various articles I see that the best case for 7nm DUV volume production of a PS5 size/power chip is early 2019 but is more expensive to make then EUV and in the quantities we're talking here, cost is everything!

So going with 7nm EUV and assuming late 2020 as the launch date then again my question is would enough chips be able to be made in console quantities right from the get go? I still don't believe any console launched with a brand spanking node? I exclude PS4 Pro because I don't believe it is high volume like a new console (500k - 1 million chips/month)

I found this article helpful in understanding the process a chip goes through before full production: http://techreport.com/review/28126/semiconductors-from-idea-to-product

 

[Bitch Pudding]

PS Now is a form of BC, for PS4 players. I never claimed it was only about BC, however, given it's library until recently (when PS4 games started appearing) it pretty much was about allowing access to legacy Sony games (on which platform isn't relevant). So yes, I get what you're saying, but again it's tangential to the point I was responding to.

No one is saying it is. Just that it exists as a form of providing access to legacy titles, and will continue to do so .

For me, PS Now is not a BC substitute, for the simple reason that PS Now doesn't give a single fuck about me already owning a game or not.

 

[Shin]

Let's look at Polaris and Zen:

Zen launched a year before schedule so not sure if that's a good example you're trying to make?
PS4 launch wasn't great as it was supply constrained for several months, at least that's how I remember it and FoxConn was manufacturing the amount you figured is needed
So yeah if there's no setbacks with EUV usage on 7nm then in theory Sony can use that node by Q2 2020.
Whether the benefit outweighs the cost (or the other way around, whichever) I don't know and probably none of us do except the fab (TSMC) and the customer (Sony).

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Zen launched a year before schedule so not sure if that's a good example you're trying to make?
PS4 launch wasn't great as it was supply constrained for several months, at least that's how I remember it and FoxConn was manufacturing the amount you figured is needed
So yeah if there's no setbacks with EUV usage on 7nm then in theory Sony can use that node by Q2 2020.
Whether the benefit outweighs the cost (or the other way around, whichever) I don't know and probably none of us do except the fab (TSMC) and the customer (Sony).

I haven't seen anything to say Zen was planned to launch/be able to buy in March 2018? (it came out in March 2017)? In fact I thought Q4/Late 2016 was the planned release date?

All I'm saying here is that there is a lot of optimism about the most fickle of things in tech. What will happen in three years even they don't know!

One thing I'm sure of is things won't go to plan.

 

[AmyS]

Speaking of ASML and EUV

ASML Claims Major EUV Milestone
7/14/2017

SAN FRANCISCO—It has taken far longer and cost far more than nearly anyone would have predicted, but the semiconductor industry finally appears close to moving extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography into high volume production.

At the Semicon West tradeshow here this week, lithography vendor ASML announced it had achieved an important and long-elusive milestone: the demonstration of a 250-watt EUV source. Source power—a measurement of the amount of EUV photons delivered to the scanner to enable wafer exposure—equates directly to productivity. Chipmakers have long insisted that source power of 250 watts would be required to achieve throughput of 125 wafers per hour (WPH), and the inability of ASML and Cymer (which ASML acquired in 2013) to push the technology to hit that mark has been considered the primary roadblock for EUV development in recent years.

Michael Lercel, director of strategic marketing at ASML, said the company has demonstrated 250 watts ”rather consistently by really understanding the conversion efficiency in the source and putting the right controls in place." He said the source that has demonstrated 250 watts has not yet shipped.

Leading edge chipmakers including Intel, Samsung, TSMC and Globalfoundries are planning to insert EUV into high-volume production sometime in the next two years. ASML demonstrated back in February throughput of 104 WPH and executives said even before the 250 watt source power was demonstrated that the company had a roadmap to get to 125 WPH.

The 250 watt source power milestone represents an improvement of 10 fold over the past five years from about 25 watts in 2012. Delivering a presentation on the economics of EUV for production, Lercel joked that when he worked at Cymer in the early part this decade the goal for reaching 250 watts of source power ”was always next year."

http://eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1332012

(2 pages)

 

[XandBosch]

This is all pretty over my head, but did I just read someone say that PS Now will continue for PS5?

................

 

[Spukc]

How can ps5 be a half step when ps5 only games will happen ?

 

[Matt]

How can ps5 be a half step when ps5 only games will happen ?

People still seem confused about this. Pachter calls the Pro a half step, and the 5 another half step. Half + half = whole.

Obviously this is all a simplification, and Pachter is both not a technical person and speculating. But it is basically true that the existence of the Pro has, well, roughly cut in half the multiplier of GPU power the 5 will experience over the 4. Obviously the CPU and memory situations will improve as well.

 

[AmyS]

How can ps5 be a half step when ps5 only games will happen ?

Pachter is looking too closely at PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, expecting PS5 to be done in a similar fashion, when he admits himself that he doesn't have a clue about technology.

He blatantly contradicts the statements of Mark Cerny, and more recently, Shawn Layden, on console generations.

 

[Darklor01]

People still seem confused about this. Pachter calls the Pro a half step, and the 5 another half step. Half + half = whole.

Obviously this is all a simplification, and Pachter is both not a technical person and speculating. But it is basically true that the existence of the Pro has, well, roughly cut in half the multiplier of GPU power the 5 will experience over the 4. Obviously the CPU and memory situations will improve as well.

If the 5 turns out to be nothing more than a 30-40% increase in processing over the PS4 Pro , even with exclusive titles, I'll tell myself I'll hold off or not buy, and then cave at pre-order or release time because, shiny new toys and I need to be sure I can play MLB The Show.

 

[Matt]

If the 5 turns out to be nothing more than a 30-40% increase in processing over the PS4 Pro , even with exclusive titles, I'll tell myself I'll hold off or not buy, and then cave at pre-order or release time because, shiny new toys and I need to be sure I can play MLB The Show.

Well you don't need to worry about that...

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Well you don't need to worry about that...

seriously...

 

[Darklor01]

Well you don't need to worry about that...

Nice...

seriously...

Good...

 

[anothertech]

Well you don't need to worry about that...

Oh shit

 

[Matt]

Nice...



Good...

lol, what in the world made you think the 5 would have the same GPU power as an XBO X?

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

If the 5 turns out to be nothing more than a 30-40% increase in processing over the PS4 Pro , even with exclusive titles, I'll tell myself I'll hold off or not buy, and then cave at pre-order or release time because, shiny new toys and I need to be sure I can play MLB The Show.

My guess is 9-12TF+much improved CPU architecture. More than enough IMO whenever it comes out.

Edit: Possibility of fixed function HW or "helper" chips?

 

[AmyS]

If the 5 turns out to be nothing more than a 30-40% increase in processing over the PS4 Pro , even with exclusive titles, I'll tell myself I'll hold off or not buy, and then cave at pre-order or release time because, shiny new toys and I need to be sure I can play MLB The Show.

Well you don't need to worry about that...

Awesomeness ^__^

 

[c0de]

Awesomeness ^__^

In which way?

 

[CREMSteve]

PS5 better be a beast. I'll pay good money.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

In which way?

PS5 at least as powerful as XBOX One X confirmed!!!!!!

*sigh*

 

[Fukuzatsu]

Naturally, I'm using a broadbrush definition of BC to mean "any solution that grants gamers access to legacy games"

This is just your definition though. For major console backwards compatability (Wii - Gamecube, PS2 - PS1, Xbox series, etc.), what it means is not just some vague notion of "games of the old system are playable on the new system", it is also that if you were a previous owner of said system, you can continue using and playing your games with the new system. When you bought a PS2 or even (later) Xbox 360 with backwards compatibility, what you assumed you were getting was the ability to buy old games and play them.

This is what PS Now fails to accomplish, and the poor catalogue only exacerbates it. You also can't just 'buy' a game, so ultimately you are constrained to effectively renting more titles than you would actually buy if just buying them were an option.

The fact of the matter is, PS Now affords PS4 gamers access to PS3 games, and will invariably afford access to PS5 gamers to play PS4 games.

Clearly, the business case is there, otherwise PS Now wouldn't exist. But it does....soooooo...

Whether Sony intends to use this as their replacement for 'Backwards Compability' (as every other platform has known it), I cannot say, but seeing as they've changed their business model for PS Now in a large way since it got started, one has to wonder how they view it.

 

[justsomeguy]

lol, what in the world made you think the 5 would have the same GPU power as an XBO X?

😂

 

[kc44135]

This is just your definition though. For major console backwards compatability (Wii - Gamecube, PS2 - PS1, Xbox series, etc.), what it means is not just some vague notion of "games of the old system are playable on the new system", it is also that if you were a previous owner of said system, you can continue using and playing your games with the new system. When you bought a PS2 or even (later) Xbox 360 with backwards compatibility, what you assumed you were getting was the ability to buy old games and play them.

This is what PS Now fails to accomplish, and the poor catalogue only exacerbates it. You also can't just 'buy' a game, so ultimately you are constrained to effectively renting more titles than you would actually buy if just buying them were an option.

Well said.

 

[Fukuzatsu]

Well said.

Besides, if anyone is keen (as TheThreadsThatBindUs seems to be) on saying BC is as broad as "old games playable in some limited extent on new systems", then why not just compile the list of games on PS4 which also saw release on PS3?

Last of Us Remastered, Uncharted Collection, GTA5, Watch Dogs, Battefield 4, AC4--by the same definition the catalogue of cross-gen games and remasters is "a form of BC", only no one would ever think of it as that because it is far too sparse. Now of course for the remasters there's more work involved in asset creation than say, GTA5, but it meets the 'broad' definition.

 

[Shin]

My guess is 9-12TF+much improved CPU architecture. More than enough IMO whenever it comes out.

Edit: Possibility of fixed function HW or "helper" chips?

Damian Thong might have been off with the release date, but the 10 teraflops prediction could end up being true :S

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Damian Thong might have been off with the release date, but the 10 teraflops prediction could end up being true :S

Seems much more reasonable to me. As Matt has said the old multipliers between gens are gone. We won't be getting 18.4TF and 128GB until 2030.....

I'm not the slightest bit worried about next gen power/performance but am more worried about when Sony can launch it. When a node becomes available and financially viable is much less in their control.

The below is what is worrying me for a future PS5 particularly the bold:

While GlobalFoundries' expectations for performance, power, area (PPA) improvements look solid, it should be noted that right now the contract manufacturer is among what's become multiple companies to have confirmed their intentions to pursue a DUV-only 7 nm process technology. DUV in this respect is the tried and true approach, however in order to create 7 nm features it will require using triple/quadruple patterning, which greatly increases design and manufacturing costs as well as cycle times over previous-gen nodes. So while there is a lot of interest in using EUV if it works, many of the major fabs are starting at the same place as GlobalFoundries and at least internally preparing for DUV-only, while hoping EUV will be ready when they want it.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10704/globalfoundries-updates-roadmap-7-nm-in-2h-2018

 

[jryi]

Naturally, I'm using a broadbrush definition of BC to mean "any solution that grants gamers access to legacy games", as that's the ultimate goal.

That is not how people usually define backwards compatibility. That is like saying that remasters of PS2 and PS3 games are a form of backwards compatibility.

Clearly, the business case is there, otherwise PS Now wouldn't exist. But it does....soooooo...

There is a business case for PS Now as a standalone service (or at least there should be, I'm not so sure they are actually profitable as is). There is no business case for offering the service for free to people who own a game that is found in the catalogue.

Clearly, this isn't true because PS Now is currently the BC solution for PS4 to play PS3 games.

No, because...

For me, PS Now is not a BC substitute, for the simple reason that PS Now doesn't give a single fuck about me already owning a game or not.

Exactly. I own a bunch of PS3 games both in physical and digital form. This doesn't mean that I could just start PS Now (if it were even available in Finland, which it isn't) and play those games for free. On the other hand, I could play any available game in the catalogue, even if I didn't own them, if I just pay the monthly fee.

Netflix isn't a backwards compatibility solution for my DVD collection on my Android TV.

Or it's a bad business purchase and they are stuck with it until they make back profit, Dave Perry already left Sony as well.
It costed them 250,000,000 I believe, whether it's worth continuing or not only they know.

It wasn't a bad purchase, because the technology stack is probably a key component in the PS4 remote play and game sharing.

 

[leeh]

There is a business case for PS Now as a standalone service (or at least there should be, I'm not so sure they are actually profitable as is). There is no business case for offering the service for free to people who own a game that is found in the catalogue.

Of course there is. If people have a good experience playing titles they own on PS Now, then they're more likely to buy a subscription to play more on the platform.

 

[Theonik]

Of course there is. If people have a good experience playing titles they own on PS Now, then they're more likely to buy a subscription to play more on the platform.

No, because the way the platform works you need subscription income in order to be able to offer the service.

 

[Darklor01]

lol, what in the world made you think the 5 would have the same GPU power as an XBO X?

I don't. Unless I'm misinterpreting Pachter's statement, he believes it would be a half step more powerful than the PS4 Pro. I'm not good with the math, but would that be about what the XBO X is to the PS4 Pro?

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

This is just your definition though. For major console backwards compatability (Wii - Gamecube, PS2 - PS1, Xbox series, etc.), what it means is not just some vague notion of "games of the old system are playable on the new system", it is also that if you were a previous owner of said system, you can continue using and playing your games with the new system. When you bought a PS2 or even (later) Xbox 360 with backwards compatibility, what you assumed you were getting was the ability to buy old games and play them.

This is what PS Now fails to accomplish, and the poor catalogue only exacerbates it. You also can't just 'buy' a game, so ultimately you are constrained to effectively renting more titles than you would actually buy if just buying them were an option.

Whether Sony intends to use this as their replacement for 'Backwards Compability' (as every other platform has known it), I cannot say, but seeing as they've changed their business model for PS Now in a large way since it got started, one has to wonder how they view it.

You're not really saying anything that I disagree with nor are you saying anything that is relevant to the discussion around BC I was having with that other poster.

The original discussion was about whether or not there was a business case for PS Now as an effective BC solution. It was implied by the original premise (that wasn't mine, by the way, so don't attribute it to me) that BC here simply referred to "a means of accessing legacy titles", since it was obvious to everyone and their uncle that PS Now is a service that isn't about letting you play games you already own. The discussion also touched on remasters as another "effective BC solution", i.e. "means of providing access to legacy content".

In general discussion, when people talk about BC in relation to remasters and services like PS Now, they're using the term "BC" loosely and placing these options under the umbrella.

From the beginning of the discussion, no-one has tried to re-define ACTUAL Backwards Compatibility, i.e. providing access to legacy content through software emulation on new console hardware.

All you're doing here is trying to start a semantic argument by taking a post out of context from its original thread of discussion. So forgive me for not wanting to respond directly to your points here, because in every sense they're irrelevant to the discussion that you clearly haven't followed properly.

At the end of the day, it's all good. I feel this line of discussion is both off-topic and been thoroughly exhausted (if not abused).

It's time to move on from the PS Now BC talk. Since it's clearly not going anywhere.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

I don't. Unless I'm misinterpreting Pachter's statement, he believes it would be a half step more powerful than the PS4 Pro. I'm not good with the math, but would that be about what the XBO X is to the PS4 Pro?

I don't like maths but the way I read what Pachter was saying is PS4 Pro was a half (2.3X) step and PS5 will be similar again. That would be ~5X PS4.

I'm guessing PS5 will be 5-6X PS4 or ~9-12TF which would be in-line with how I interpret what Pachter was getting at?

 

[Theonik]

I don't. Unless I'm misinterpreting Pachter's statement, he believes it would be a half step more powerful than the PS4 Pro. I'm not good with the math, but would that be about what the XBO X is to the PS4 Pro?

A half-step, in our terms would be 2-3x times which is what the PS4 Pro and XBO X are to the PS4 respectively.

The gap between the PS4 Pro and XBO X is only about 40% close to the gap between PS4 and the Bone.

 

[pentium486]

It is pretty clear Sony are setting up PSNow for the future. Streaming devices are getting more and more, with computing power in all sorts of devices going up as well. In a few years dedicated consoles might not be THAT important anymore. At some point in the future you will be able to stream games to many devices, not just Playstations and PCs. THAT is what they are setting up. Sony wants to remain in business when physical consoles lose their relevance.

 

[Darklor01]

A half-step, in our terms would be 2-3x times which is what the PS4 Pro and XBO X are to the PS4 respectively.

The gap between the PS4 Pro and XBO X is only about 40% close to the gap between PS4 and the Bone.

Ah, so, my guesstimation of what his statement was is incorrect. OK.

 

[pentium486]

I don't like maths but the way I read what Pachter was saying is PS4 Pro was a half (2.3X) step and PS5 will be similar again. That would be ~5X PS4.

I'm guessing PS5 will be 5-6X PS4 or ~9-12TF which would be in-line with how I interpret what Pachter was getting at?

Clearly not. Pachter doesn't have a clue about the technical stuff (he admits it himself). No way he can meant the computing power.

With half step he meant the compatibility. He goes on about this in detail, where you can play PS4 games on the Pro, and games with Pro support will (according to him) be playable on the PS5, closing that upgrade gap between console generations. PS5 games will then be able to run on the Pro until PS5.5 arrives, which will then cancel out the Pro.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

That is not how people usually define backwards compatibility. That is like saying that remasters of PS2 and PS3 games are a form of backwards compatibility.

That's exactly how plenty people I've spoken to have used the term BC. In fact remasters, are one of the prime examples of "forms" people have placed under this umbrella.

Of course, that's an incorrect usage of the term BC, based on it's strict definition. As people should in fact be saying "a substitute for BC" as opposed to a "form of BC". Regardless, this is just getting into semantics, in which case it becomes a fruitless thing to debate...

which actually beings me to my next point...

There is a business case for PS Now as a standalone service (or at least there should be, I'm not so sure they are actually profitable as is). There is no business case for offering the service for free to people who own a game that is found in the catalogue.

Well... like, duh.... When you initially stated "there's no business case for BC using PS Now" I interpreted that to mean "there's no business case for PS Now, as a solution to providing legacy content", which should have been obvious from my responses. I didn't expect you meaning to be "PS Now as a solution to letting players play the legacy games they already own for free", as I thought that that's is so obvious that it's not even worth stating, and also, how would such a solution even work?!?

If that's really what you meant, then we've both been arguing different things and there's no point continuing this line of debate. Since your original statement becomes almost a truism, one that's impossible to disagree with, that's kinda not really worth discussing further.

It wasn't a bad purchase, because the technology stack is probably a key component in the PS4 remote play and game sharing.

I'm pretty sure PS3 remote play existed before the Gaikai purchase. I think you mean Shareplay?

 

[Shin]

A half-step, in our terms would be 2-3x times which is what the PS4 Pro and XBO X are to the PS4 respectively.

The gap between the PS4 Pro and XBO X is only about 40% close to the gap between PS4 and the Bone.

2-3x sounds about right, even if we go with the 1.8TF increase of XBOX over PS4 Pro per year, you'd get 5.4TF +6 of XBOX = 11.4TF
That's not factoring process shrink and GPU/CPU architectural gains, it will be somewhere around there, on paper and presentation 12TF looks better.
Wish we'd get a hint which year they are targeting and/or performance estimate (if though it could end up changing for better or for worse).

The 4GB DDR4L/3L we were discussing, 2.5GB is reserved on the PS4 ATM yeah with another 512MB freed up from the 1GB DDR3L when it's not used by applications and the likes?
In theory 4GB should be enough, but will it really be though, seems like that's cutting it close, alternative would be to cut in on the 16GB GDDR6 if they need more for whatever reason.

 

[unapersson]

This is just your definition though. For major console backwards compatability (Wii - Gamecube, PS2 - PS1, Xbox series, etc.), what it means is not just some vague notion of "games of the old system are playable on the new system", it is also that if you were a previous owner of said system, you can continue using and playing your games with the new system. When you bought a PS2 or even (later) Xbox 360 with backwards compatibility, what you assumed you were getting was the ability to buy old games and play them.

Do any of them really do this any more now? Most have a dependency on online infrastructure and involve downloading/streaming/buying some kind of modified version. The pop in an old disk/cartridge and play off the media model seems dead sadly.

Source?

Microsoft doesn't seem to be involved.

Sadly it was years ago and my google-fu isn't good enough to find the article now. It was one of their many virtualization acquisitions, but I can't remember whether it was a whole company or just some staff/tech. I just remember thinking at the time that they now had all the bits to emulate the 360 as that was the last piece (along with Connectix/Softricity).

It's not unusual though, I think the PS2 on PS4 emulation is based on tech that Sony acquired.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Clearly not. Pachter doesn't have a clue about the technical stuff (he admits it himself). No way he can meant the computing power.

With half step he meant the compatibility. He goes on about this in detail, where you can play PS4 games on the Pro, and games with Pro support will (according to him) be playable on the PS5, closing that upgrade gap between console generations. PS5 games will then be able to run on the Pro until PS5.5 arrives, which will then cancel out the Pro.

Clearly not? I disagree:

“I really like Shawn and I don’t think he is attempting to mislead anybody. The PlayStation 4 Pro is better [from a technical perspective] than the PS4, so I think that’s a half step towards the PlayStation 5. I think the PS5 will be another half step. So he is being honest when he said he is not doing a half step but the PlayStation 5…how much faster can it be? It will surely support 4K. Will it support 240 frames per second? Great. Will it play games that were made for the PlayStation 4 PRO? That’s the question. I think it will. So I think they will build a console that will backwards compatible with the PS4 Pro. So I think it will be perceived by the consumers to be a half step and I think Shawn is telling the truth when he says it’s will be a full fledged console,” he said to GamingBolt.
Read more at http://gamingbolt.com/ps5-will-like...h-in-2019-michael-pachter#SSj0RrCj45a4qFoQ.99

Sure BC is part of what he talks about and I agree he isn't in to the tech side as he admits himself but still...