Support NeoGAF

[Zukuu]

Only used. And why should people keep having to buying PS3's just to maintain a digital library? That doesn't make any sense.

Why should people buy multiple PS3s to begin with?


And why should people buy vinyl player to play their vinyl?
Why isn't every cassettes player backwards compatible with vinyls? Or why isn't every CD player compatible with cassettes?
MOVE ONE FFS. Just keep your frigging PS3 and you don't need BC if you're so eager to play them. >_>
The ps5 might be able to emulate PS3 games, so I don't understand that view point at all.

 

[squidyj]

Only used. And why should people keep having to buying PS3's just to maintain a digital library? That doesn't make any sense.

why should the 99% have to pay so the 1% who will actually use it can have BC?

 

[KiNeSiS]

I wanted BC so I could sell my ps3 and use that money to get a PS4 with all my games being able to be played on one PS console. Not a big deal though I will just have to wait a bit longer for the PS4. Delay the eventual purchase.

Whats BSD?

Very logical & it's exactly how the common non neo gaf gamer would think. This hive mind shit is for the turds & herbs. You can't help those crying for more. The great Mark Cerny revealed that no BC was the devs choice. The choice is a money grab to keep re releasing Capcom made a career out of re releases even before bc was a concept. You know what you call someone who willingly gets hustled? A muthafuckin chump. Stop being complacent chumps making excuses.

*Mark Cerny to devs *

Cerny- Capcom how do you feel about backward compatibility?

Capcom- We would prefer to resell SSF2, Sf3 3rd strike, Re 4, Re 5, even Re6 REEEEEEEMIIIIIIIX!

Cerny- How about you Namco.

Namco- Yes Capcom has a point we want to make another Tekken collection. & put from to work on porting DaS 1& 2 to ps4.

Activision- COD collection sold individually online 25 bucks each title & another TH remake.


(etc.) (etc.) (etc.) (etc.)

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ CHA CHING CHUMPS $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

[KiNeSiS]

why should the 99% have to pay so the 1% who will actually use it can have BC?

Why should the future erase all of our hard earned purchases?
Making them irrelevant when the consoles are out of production. Don't be daft you act like BC would significantly drive up cost. If you had the option of making your PS3 truly obsolete by completely selling it & not having to worry about keeping it to play your backlog. You wouldn't jump on that?
I'd rather use the space my ps3 & 360 take up for their respective successors.
Secondly you make me laugh with the tired line bc raises costs. 2 words suck it! Nah seriously 2 words Multiple Skus. One beast with BC one lesser beast without. That is a sollution that would make everyone, other than money grubbing greedy dev(il)s of coarse.

Also the guy talking about why can't tapes play cds, or record players can't play tapes. With brain dead comparisons you act as if BC is unheard of & is some foreign concept. Get real! Are you people even gamers? I get the impression from some of you that games are disposable & when you aquire a PS4 the PS3 is suddenly trash.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I've been an early adopter since the PS1, I beg to differ. Up to this point with Playstation consoles, I've been able to buy the next generation of hardware to play most of the games that are current and that's been a valuable differentiator for me.

That's nice, and I agree it's a plus. But I doubt your anecdote is particularly representative.

Tell that to the guys that rushed to buy 600 dollar PS3's after it was announed that bc would be eliminated.

A) that has nothing to do with early adopters and B) more PS3s have been sold annually without BC than with.

You seem to think that you are everyone, because you damned sure believe you know what everyone is thinking. You must be that God fellow christians are always scaring people with.

Au contraire. It doesn't matter whether or not, I would like BC - it is something that would be nice to have. I'm capable of delineating what I'd like to have and care about and what the majority of people care about. Something that apparently escapes those that think that inclusion of BC "for preservation" or other trivialities over things that actually matter like price, or the opportunity-cost to other hardware components.

But sure, let's pretend the majority of people go out to buy new, expensive systems that they can already play on either systems they own already or systems that can be had for a fraction of the price.

More people will buy a cheaper system without BC, than those who will buy a more expensive system that includes BC.

 

[KiNeSiS]

You think more ps3s were sold because of lack of BC . I Burn that flimsy straw man you throw at me.
They sold because they were half the price. You know that damned well yourself don't play dumb or downplay that fact.

Price will always come down if you have patience, If not don't buy the premium sku.
When there is an option that correlates with your needs, choose it.
My stance on games of a prior gen is similar to classic car enthusiasts. They collect & keep obsolete cars to preserve their passion we do the same to preserve ours the vehicle being the software. As long as I can play the software the way it was meant to be than the original hardware is meaningless.
Everyone has different needs & for me particularly preservation is highly significant, while to you it may be trivial. It broke my heart when my O.G. 80 gig died. I still view my slim while more quiet & efficient as obsolete in comparison because it's stripped of a significant feature.

I'm probably coming off as a prick in this discussion I am just passionate about all eras of gaming, this era especially as it is the longest running, I am heavily invested. Besides it's no secret the hardware failure rates are disgusting this go round. I simply don't trust any of this hardware to last as long as my PS2 has. Also I most likely put a ton more mileage on my PS3 & 360 because of the other services besides gaming. For example I'm typing on a PS3 controller in it's sub par browser right now. (which I use more often than any sane man would.)

 

[ionicbluebird]

Someone willing to translate the article ?

Thanks.

This^

 

[Sorral]

You think more ps3s were sold because of lack of BC . I Burn that flimsy straw man you throw at me.
They sold because they were half the price. You know that damned well yourself don't play dumb or downplay that fact.

Isn't that what he was essentially saying though? That they sold because they were cheaper since they didn't include BC? With BC, it will be more expensive and it will not even sell much to make it worth it...
If people wanted BC so bad, it would have still sold when it was double the price/regardless of the price point. But that wasn't the case now was it?

Edit: Honestly, I would rather see people discuss what Cerny added of new information than fight over BC, but too late for this now I guess.

 

[shinra-bansho]

You think more ps3s were sold because of lack of BC . I Burn that flimsy straw man you throw at me.
They sold because they were half the price. You know that damned well yourself don't play dumb or downplay that fact.

Price will always come down if you have patience, If not don't buy the premium sku when there is an option that correlates with your needs.

Lol. The irony of using a straw man argument in one sentence, and then misusing the term "straw man" in the following.

Where did I say more PS3's sold because of a lack of BC? I said more PS3's sold annually after the removal of BC; an entirely different and empirically accurate statement. They sold because those people do not care enough about BC, while they do care about price.

 

[Zen]

Early adopters aren't buying a next generation console to play last generation games.

Eh I've always bought my PS console happily enjoying the modest upgrades I was given on my old collection. Heck when the PS3 gcame out there were PS2 games here and there that came out and I bought with the intention of playing on my PS3. God of War II for example.

I'll deal, but it would have been nice to play PS3 games at a better framerate with added AA and good up-scaling, or something.

 

[IonicSnake]

I would happily drop BC if it meant making a developer friendly and cheaper console.

 

[Panajev2001a]

That is technically true but when your whole company is upgrading to the next OS and platform there was significant issues with FCP and the majority of the Adobe Suite.

Issues which could have been fixed and mostly were fixed IIRC by software updates from the software vendors. The 64 bit transition hurt some developers the most because Apple, rightfully so IMHO, pushed Cocoa as the only 64 bit API killing the 64 bit Carbon project.

 

[KiNeSiS]

You got it twisted buckaroo. The straw man in question is it sold better at half the price regardless of bc.
You used the sales spike to support your "See people don't care about backward compatibility" standpoint when reality people do care. They just don't care enough to drop 6 yards on it when a fresh out the box PS2 cost $100 at the time. Besides everyone that followed gaming knew about the price drop. Why pay 599 when you can get it for 350?

Lets agree to disagree, One thing we can all agree on is PS4 will be a monster.

 

[gofreak]

Um, there are a pile of apps and games that don't run on my iPad 1. Same with original iPhone, 3G, 3GS etc. you have to check each app individually.

I was about to make this point, but it's a point about forwards compatibility.

The iOS/Android model might be ideal from a backwards compatibility point of view. And it's fine to say that people would scream blue murder if their iOS apps didn't work on their newest iOS device.

But while consoles might fall down on the backwards compatibility front, they still excel at a different kind of software compatibility value. In this passing generation they've offered 7/8 years of forward compatibility, with a good progression in the evolution of software sophistication in that time. I will be able to buy a game like The Last of Us, this year, 7 years after I bought my PS3, and it will play just as well on my PS3 as a PS3 bought today.

Meanwhile in smartphone land it's quite possible to find (high profile) software that won't run on devices bought even 18 months prior. That was the case with Infinity Blade, for example.

Yes, full BC would be ideal, I would love it. But in comparing to iOS etc. let's not be too down on the alternative kind of 'compatibility value' offered by consoles Consoles still make a very strong value promise to the consumer on this front, but in a different way.

 

[Muchi Muchi Pink]

PS4 Kernel is Unix.

Unix-like
Mac OSX is powered by a FreeBSD kernel see the darwin project.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Lets agree to disagree, One thing we can all agree on is PS4 will be a monster.

We can do that if you like, I still think the majority of early adopters would care more about price than BC, that the two are opposing factors, and that it won't significant affect sales in any way. At this point I'm not sure if you do or don't agree with those propositions.

But in any event, you should look up the definition of straw man. It is the setting up a false opposing argument with the intent to attack that argument instead of the actual argument at hand. I didn't do that; I didn't create an artificial argument and pretend you said it. But that's what you did with regards to the point about sales post-BC.

You can disagree that it shows that people don't care about BC, but nowhere did I say that people bought it "because" of a lack of BC, nor was the intent to present as such - to imply so, is a straw man.

 

[test_account]

On backward compability and sales, the WiiU has full backward compability with the Wii, but that doesnt seem to have any big effect on the WiiU sales. It is possible that the WiiU sales might have been even lower if it didnt have Wii backward compability of course, but i dont think the sales of the WiiU would have looked that much different.

And what happens when the PS3 stops being manufactured? What happens when the PS3s that people already have eventually die?

The lack of concern for preservation in this thread is disturbing. It doesn't matter if they don't use it, it should be part of the console. The consumer shouldn't be in this equation anyways, Sony should eat the cost of it themselves -- consumers shouldn't be forced to suffer from Sony's lack of foresight in choosing a specialty architecture with no roadmap for the future for the PS3. It is their problem, and people here are letting them get away with taking the easy route that is harmful to consumers, harmful to every game released on the PS3, and harmful to the medium as a whole -- furthering the perception that games are cheap, vapid entertainment that is simply disposed of when its time is up.

Having backward compability is something positive when it comes to preservation indeed, but lacking backward compabiity is not necessarily something that will put a huge risk on the possibility to preserve something. How many systems have been released since the Atari 2600? Maybe something around 30? How many of those systems are being produced today and how many of the newer consoles have backward compability for those older systems? It is almost non excistant (i think PS3 is the only one, which can also play PS1 games). But there are not any big problems to get any of these older systems today. Preservation will happen regardless if backward compability doesnt excist. Either if it is using old hardware, or doing it through software emulation. Based on these things, personally i'm not worried about preservation

Now, we can use the arguement that newer systems are more advance, which means a higher chance of something going wrong. And it could also be harder to do software emulation because the systems are getting more and more advance. But concidering how many PS3s and Xbox 360s that excist, i dont think there will be any big problem to find working units many, many years from now on.

I'm all for preservation of older games though, so i hope that the PS3 will be software emulated some day.


About having a roadmap for the future, it is possible that Sony thought about this, but it is very hard to know exaclty what will happen in many years from now on. One can argue that it was a mistake to use an "unknown" architecture in the PS3, but at the time maybe it seemed like a good idea. What if the CELL CPU had become something that was widely used? Then the PS4 would probably have a big chance to be based on CELL as well. It isnt always easy to forsee these things, especially with how rapidly technology evolves. There is also the risk/reward factor, in the business world, everyone cant play it safe all the time. I dont think it is a good idea to stick with the old stuff just because a decition was made years ago. Moving forward/chaning could have more advantages in the long run. In the case with the PS4, i think that the change in the architecture will benefit stuff in the long run, also regarding backward compability in the PS5 when that time comes

 

[PuppetMaster]

redacted

 

[Always-honest]

I'm okay with all of this.

Yep, me too.

 

[IrishNinja]

elements of GAF continue all but celebrating losing a connection to nearly 20 years of an excellent sony library, all while many threads point to numerous members still unaware that there's no difference between physical and digital BC.

it's gonna be interesting when the average consumer finds out their PSN purchases dont carry over.

Not really. Devs/Publishers want to be able to rerelease old games. HD collections, PS1/2 Classics, and XBLA is good money. If PS4/Durango had full BC it would kill any type of future business. So even though it sucks for us, Sony has their hands tied.

what the....? early PS3's were full BC, that didn't stop these collections from selling

Well, the PS3's sales really took off once they removed the PS2 BC. I think that shows that most consumers really don't view BC as some make or break feature. It's nice to have, but those consumers want to buy a PS4 to play PS4 games.

no idea how you make that correlation, when the price drop and actual software beginning to manifest look far, far more likely to be actual factors

PS3 wasn't really PS3 it was PS1+PS2+PS3. No wonder why there was 499 price tag back then

One option is much cheaper for the general population and those don't care for BC as seeing how PS3 sales jumped up after it dropped in price by 100.

Tretton himself pointed to the dropping of BC not being a cost issue - the price tag had to do with custom parts, blu ray diodes etc

In the end, greater dev support is more important because that support is what customers end up wanting most.

I'm bitter that BC is gone.. but now that it's gone forever, you gotta let go.

i agree with the first sentence, not the second. as i highly value BC, i accept the reality that sony had to make this move, but it's a result of the kind've hubris that jumped into cell technology to begin with.

if nextbox also lacks BC, i'll likely end up with a PS4 this gen, but it's going to have to offer a great deal for that trade off, and much of my year 1 hype is killed.

Wow just one (you know who you are) person has managed to turn this thread into an argument about backwards compatibility. Its not supported in PS4, they have said it many times, It doesn't matter if you think BC is important or not. SONY has announced to the WORLD that PS4 won't have HW BC of PS3 games. Don't buy a PS4 if your PS3 games are so precious to you, its that simple.

if the topic keeps coming up, clearly it's not that simple, is it? SONY will probably do just fine without you defending their honor/decisions here

And what happens when the PS3 stops being manufactured? What happens when the PS3s that people already have eventually die?

The lack of concern for preservation in this thread is disturbing. It doesn't matter if they don't use it, it should be part of the console. The consumer shouldn't be in this equation anyways, Sony should eat the cost of it themselves -- consumers shouldn't be forced to suffer from Sony's lack of foresight in choosing a specialty architecture with no roadmap for the future for the PS3. It is their problem, and people here are letting them get away with taking the easy route that is harmful to consumers, harmful to every game released on the PS3, and harmful to the medium as a whole -- furthering the perception that games are cheap, vapid entertainment that is simply disposed of when its time is up.

Threads will continue to do that until people have definitive evidence that the PS4 can compensate for the deficiency. I don't see the harm in cracking the whip over Sony's head to emphasize that they've created a significant hurdle for themselves to overcome. Until we get official launch details, I don't see the point in relenting - for our own sake as gamers. I don't want to see another typical post-launch drought if there's no BC to fall back on.

these guys, they get it.
me, i understand that not everyone makes as high a priority of BC, though i do find it disheartening to see some "hardcore gamers" on here that couldn't seem to care less about a game past its launch week - i didn't even realistically expect the option of a more expensive legacy model catering to my desires here.

but the "keep your PS3/who cares about BC & old games lol" type shit, much less the pass they seem to be given here by fanboys is troubling. i guess the writing should've been on the wall when they made a bullet point of it last gen (even mocking MS for their weak BC efforts), then dropping it. i imagine there were corporate cheerleaders celebrating that as well, too.

More like they don't want to pay for CD audio licensing fees when 10 people will play a CD on their PS4.

also understandable, and correct me if im wrong here but weren't sony themselves part of that licensing fee?

 

[Mogwai]

[*]They mention having to drop BC as being a necessary evil to make sure devs will be happy going forward.

That's probably the most stupid argument I've heard for not including BC. It's almost like a statement saying "our older games are not worth playing, so wait the new ones and pay!" Nintendo has BC because their games are actually worth playing more than once. Sony may not think this?

 

[Whiteshirt]

So people bought the PS3 because its so cheap. So, for the mass consumer, price is far more of a concern than BC. That's the argument. No one is stupid enough to buy a console because it doesn't have BC. They bought it because it was cheaper, which was made possible by the lack of BC hardware.

So I don't see what's the problem. If you want to put BC into the PS4, that will require increased complexity to the overall design not to mention the fact you need to shove a whole PS3 into the PS4. Having two completely different hardware designs, one having extremely limited interest, just makes manufacturing and distribution a pain in the ass.

For Sony, its probably not worth the resources to go this route again. For devs, the shift away from some souped up Cell processor is a huge positive (which is the main reason why devs seem to like the PS4 not because they can sell HD remakes). For most consumers, the PS4 without PS3 hardware inside it is a net positive since it'll be significantly cheaper.

Its a bit short sighted for Sony to have picked the Cell in the first place but some things don't go as planned.

That's probably the most stupid argument I've heard for not including BC. It's almost like a statement saying "our older games are not worth playing, so wait the new ones and pay!" Nintendo has BC because their games are actually worth playing more than once. Sony may not think this?

How on earth do you come to such a conclusion? For a while, Sony was going to go with some souped up Cell processor for their PS4. The shift to x86 is what they mean by that statement.

 

[IrishNinja]

So people bought the PS3 because its so cheap. So, for the mass consumer, price is far more of a concern than BC. That's the argument. No one is stupid enough to buy a console because it doesn't have BC. They bought it because it was cheaper, which was made possible by the lack of BC hardware.

again, according to Tretton, it's not the factor some are making it here

If you want to put BC into the PS4, that will require increased complexity to the overall design not to mention the fact you need to shove a whole PS3 into the PS4.

to the last bit: as i recall, the 80 GB unit didn't entirely do that, and it offered a very high % of BC.

It's true they could have it both ways by including a Cell processor for BC functions, alongside the x86, but then you have a repercussion for cost. And price has been demonstrably way way more important for the market than BC.

sadly, this. and that's a much more apt way to put it than some of the odd sony defenders in here making it seem as though BC isn't worth discussing.

 

[gofreak]

That's probably the most stupid argument I've heard for not including BC. It's almost like a statement saying "our older games are not worth playing, so wait the new ones and pay!"

?

In the full article they talk about this a lot more than the bullet point summary, and the other guy even talks about how in Japan in particular the idea of going with x86 over Cell caused some concern wrt backwards compatibility. So I think they did recognise what they were sacrificing. But they ultimately decided between the two, that going with something very developer friendly was more important.

It's true they could have it both ways by including a Cell processor for BC functions, alongside the x86, but then you have a repercussion for cost. And price has been demonstrably way way more important for the market than BC.

 

[test_account]

That's probably the most stupid argument I've heard for not including BC. It's almost like a statement saying "our older games are not worth playing, so wait the new ones and pay!" Nintendo has BC because their games are actually worth playing more than once. Sony may not think this?

No, what that statement means is that it was better for the developers to have an easier architechture to work with rather than giving them CELL all over again. The developers makes the games, and people want new games. Making it easier to develope those games is worth the sacrificing of backward compability. That is what the statement means. Otherwise it wouldnt have included "necessary evil". "Necessary evil" indicates that they know losing backward compability is a sacrifce being made.

Why would you need a new system to be able to play a game more than once? (i know what you mean, but i just wanted to mention that you dont need a new system to enjoy a game more than once. For example, if i want to play NES today, i play my original NES).

 

[Monocle]

A lot of this sounds great. The one thing I can't get past is how backward compatibility is being marginalized. Ever since I bought my first PS2, I've thought BC is easily one of the best features a console can have—the kind of feature that just makes sense to include in every machine because its benefits are so significant and obvious. Nobody needs to be told why it's a good thing that the PS2 supports PS1 games. Nobody needs to be convinced that it's convenient to be able to play your current-gen collection on your brand new console, or to play last-gen titles you missed. So how in the world did we reach a point where a company like Sony can treat BC like some useless gimmick without a major backlash from their customers?

I personally consider the absence of BC in any modern console an outrage, to the point where it's a major factor in my buying decisions. I feel like this should be a more common attitude. We intend to keep on playing the games we enjoy too much to sell, don't we? If so, surely it's not ideal to have to dust off and wire in a separate console every time we want to revisit an old title. As appealing as the PS4 seems based on current info, with BC it would be so much better.

 

[gofreak]

It appears Gamasutra got to sit down with Cerny also, and will be posting an in-depth article a little later.

Not sure if it was as part of a roundtable with the Watch Impress guys, but either way we'll either get a new article or an English version

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/189368/Inside_the_PlayStation_4_with_Mark_Cerny.php

There are a couple of interesting comments in this 'teaser' though.

Mark Cerny originally began to think about designing the PlayStation 4 in 2007. Over Thanksgiving weekend, a mere year after the PlayStation 3 was released, he began to read technical documents about the X86 processor -- the processor that ended up going into the system that was unveiled this past February, by Cerny, in New York City.

The fact that he spent so much of his personal time working on the question of just what hardware should go into the box made Cerny realize something important: "I probably have more passion about the next generation than anybody inside the Sony Computer Entertainment world."

With that in mind, he pitched his bosses on letting him lead the PlayStation 4 development efforts. To his surprise, he earned himself the role of lead system architect.

So in 2008, once he'd gotten the okay, Cerny began to canvass PlayStation 3 developers, asking them what they wanted from a theoretical next generation console -- yes, that early.

...

"My first tour of the developers, I had a questionnaire where I just asked them their thoughts on what the next generation might bring," he says. "The largest piece of feedback we got was that they wanted unified memory."

The system also will ship with an eight-core CPU, another decision that came from the developer-questioning phase. "We quickly could tell that we should put either four or eight cores on the hardware," Cerny says. "The consensus was that any more than eight, and special techniques would be needed to use them, to get efficiency."

Worth bearing in mind, perhaps, that a next-gen Cell derivative would probably have required scaling the number of cores well beyond 8...

 

[Whiteshirt]

again, according to Tretton, it's not the factor some are making it here

to the last bit: as i recall, the 80 GB unit didn't entirely do that, and it offered a very high % of BC.

The link doesn't work but I found a cached version of it. Jack Tretton's reasoning is...strange. Cutting out BC so people with the entry-level PlayStation 3 start buying PS3 games? Why would you get a PS3 in the first place then if you're just going to play PS2 games?

Also, you're right. The CECHE01 has some software BC support though I'm not sure why Sony took it out. The homebrew (or whatever its called) scene has unlocked PS2 software BC on the PS3 so it definitely works fairly well. Someone mentioned that Sony + publishers wanted to sell HD remakes but most of them don't seem to light up the charts so what's the point?

I think my point still stands. I don't think the PS4, with Jag cores, will be able to software emulate anything from the PS3. Its just not powerful enough and the processor design is worlds different. Its a shame that they've had to move to a new architecture but I understand the decision. I don't think anyone liked developing for the PS3, which is a bit of a problem when you're not the indisputable top dog anymore.

 

[IrishNinja]

^excellent post Monocle, totally agree

Why would you need a new system to be able to play a game more than once? (i know what you mean, but i just wanted to mention that you dont need a new system to enjoy a game more than once. For example, if i want to play NES today, i play my original NES).

i get this point, but i do like saving on shelf space/HDMI slots etc. moreover, sony in particular has always sort've spoiled me with BC extras: PS2 gave several visual options, PS3 let me play my library with the ability to store nearly infinite memory cards on the drive, and back up as well (something i hadn't been able to do since the PS1's dex drive!), plus wireless play was cool. likewise, the vita allows a 2nd stick for some PSP games...i really appreciate that they do this kind've thing, and part of that stings even more now that it's gone.

The link doesn't work but I found a cached version of it. Jack Tretton's reasoning is...strange. Cutting out BC so people with the entry-level PlayStation 3 start buying PS3 games? Why would you get a PS3 in the first place then if you're just going to play PS2 games?

Also, you're right. The CECHE01 has some software BC support though I'm not sure why Sony took it out. The homebrew (or whatever its called) scene has unlocked PS2 software BC on the PS3 so it definitely works fairly well. Someone mentioned that Sony + publishers wanted to sell HD remakes but most of them don't seem to light up the charts so what's the point?

ah, apologies for the link...it did work until quite recently, odd that.

and yeah, i also find that puzzling: PS2 had a fantastic library which, sure the HD collections managed some of the most popular one, and a very small handful were remade for PSN, but overall, a rather low % of its quality was tapped into. people make this argument with nintendo as well, but looking at their current eshop, it doesnt happen (and im starting to wonder if they have any intent to revisit their GC library past the wind waker remake). its like the worst of both worlds, because the feature's removed and they don't actually exploit the market the way so many assume they will.

yeah, i saw that recent thread on the hacking too, which made me a bit more salty since it kinda goes on sony's list of lies. to your last bit: yeah, i don't see PS3 emulation happening either. part of me is worried that system will end up as the next saturn, in terms of difficulty to properly emulate.

also im not overly excited about the Gakai option, but i'd love to be wrong there as well.

 

[Log4Girlz]

A lot of this sounds great. The one thing I can't get past is how backward compatibility is being marginalized. Ever since I bought my first PS2, I've thought BC is easily one of the best features a console can have—the kind of feature that just makes sense to include in every machine because its benefits are so significant and obvious. Nobody needs to be told why it's a good thing that the PS2 supports PS1 games. Nobody needs to be convinced that it's convenient to be able to play your current-gen collection on your brand new console, or to play last-gen titles you missed. So how in the world did we reach a point where a company like Sony can treat BC like some useless gimmick without a major backlash from their customers?

I personally consider the absence of BC in any modern console an outrage, to the point where it's a major factor in my buying decisions. I feel like this should be a more common attitude. We intend to keep on playing the games we enjoy too much to sell, don't we? If so, surely it's not ideal to have to dust off and wire in a separate console every time we want to revisit an old title. As appealing as the PS4 seems based on current info, with BC it would be so much better.

Allowing devs close to the metal is a blessing and a curse.

 

[mrklaw]

The fact that he spent so much of his personal time working on the question of just what hardware should go into the box made Cerny realize something important: "I probably have more passion about the next generation than anybody inside the Sony Computer Entertainment world."

With that in mind, he pitched his bosses on letting him lead the PlayStation 4 development efforts. To his surprise, he earned himself the role of lead system architect.

wtf? going on that mentality, the PS4 would have been designed by GAF

 

[drivingpro]

Beaten edit...

 

[slider]

wtf? going on that mentality, the PS4 would have been designed by GAF

Well I'm sure he had other qualifications too! I mean aside from "really wanting to".

 

[IrishNinja]

wtf? going on that mentality, the PS4 would have been designed by GAF

except you're forgetting that he's Mark fucking Cerny

 

[stryke]

Unsure if posted or not (TLDR

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/189368/Inside_the_PlayStation_4_with_Mark_Cerny.php


Nothing new but...
"In a forthcoming article, Gamasutra will share the many details of the PlayStation 4's architecture and design that came to light during this extensive and highly technical conversation. "

Wow, only five posts above you. Way to go the extra mile

 

[flipswitch]

"My first tour of the developers, I had a questionnaire where I just asked them their thoughts on what the next generation might bring," he says. "The largest piece of feedback we got was that they wanted unified memory."

So they basically wanted an Xbox 360

 

[gundamkyoukai]

It appears Gamasutra got to sit down with Cerny also, and will be posting an in-depth article a little later.

Not sure if it was as part of a roundtable with the Watch Impress guys, but either way we'll either get a new article or an English version

Seems like it going to be a good read can't wait to find out how things came about .

 

[drivingpro]

Wow, only five posts above you. Way to go the extra mile

No worries any time, I did it especially for you

 

[AOC83]

Lol. The irony of using a straw man argument in one sentence, and then misusing the term "straw man" in the following.

Where did I say more PS3's sold because of a lack of BC? I said more PS3's sold annually after the removal of BC; an entirely different and empirically accurate statement. They sold because those people do not care enough about BC, while they do care about price.

Exactly. BC is one of the least important things about a console and it´s sure as hell not worth to sacrifice a reasonable price or easy software development for it. Would be suicide.

 

[IrishNinja]

BC is one of the least important things about a console

no, that would be apps, browsers & kinect.

 

[Prezhulio]

Looks like bestbuy might have some new shots of the ps4 eye? I haven't seen a look at it like this under the controls section at least, but maybe they are old official pics from the reveal.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Video-G...050012.c?id=pcmcat295700050012&ref=56&loc=137

Also the presentation makes me believe even more it will be bundled with every ps4 since they explicitly say move controller sold seperately, but not that for the eye. I'm sure that's because the decision hasn't been made though.

 

[test_account]

elements of GAF continue all but celebrating losing a connection to nearly 20 years of an excellent sony library, all while many threads point to numerous members still unaware that there's no difference between physical and digital BC.

Thats looking at it a bit backwards (or what i shall call it) in my opinion. It would be similar to say that some people were celebrating because Nintendo didnt include more powerful hardware in the WiiU, and also not including multitouch for the 3DS and the WiiU. They werent celebrating these things, but they just dont see it as that big of a deal to them personally. If these things were included, i dont think anyone would complain about it. In the PS4 case, i think the celebration is because of the advantages that the new architecture will bring, not because of losing backward compability.

People are also not losing connection to 20 years of Sony library. I think i know what you mean, but i think it is important to point out that many people still have the original systems. And even if they dont have the older systems anymore, getting one used is no problem condering how many that are available at Ebay etc.. They could always have the connection if they want.

We also dont know if PS4 wont have any backward compability at all. Sony hasnt ruled out this as far as i know. Personally i will be very surprised if at least not digital download PS1 games wont work. There should be no problem including this.

About no difference between physical and digital BC, i hope that most people (at least those who discuss this subject) are aware of this by now, that digital download stuff wont work either.

i get this point, but i do like saving on shelf space/HDMI slots etc. moreover, sony in particular has always sort've spoiled me with BC extras: PS2 gave several visual options, PS3 let me play my library with the ability to store nearly infinite memory cards on the drive, and back up as well (something i hadn't been able to do since the PS1's dex drive!), plus wireless play was cool. likewise, the vita allows a 2nd stick for some PSP games...i really appreciate that they do this kind've thing, and part of that stings even more now that it's gone.

Sure, i see the thing about convenience and such things I dont use backward compability that much myself, but i understand why some people want it. Backward compability has it's advantages for sure.

What i'm mostly arguing about are the points where its kinda being said that once newer system gets out that doesnt have BC, then the old systems "vanishes". Well, that isnt exactly being said to be fair, but it feels to me like some of the arguements are close to being in that area. I think it is important to point out that the older systems are not gone eventhough new system comes out. I also argue a bit what advantages remoing backward compability can have, instead of it being removed just to be removed.

I'm all for preservation of older games and systems though, so i hope that the PS3 will be software emulated some day.

By the way, as i mentioned above, i think that the PS4 will at least support PS1 digital download games. Sony already have a PS1 emulator for PS3, PSP and Vita (and maybe it is 100% software emulation on PS2 as well?). I cant see any reason why they wouldnt port this to the PS4. Well, it probably takes a bit of time and cost some money, but still.

 

[AOC83]

no, that would be apps, browsers & kinect.

According to Microsoft that´s the most important one.

 

[test_account]

Regarding backward compability, what is kinda "funny" in my case is that the only place where i've been affected with the lack of backward compability is on the PC, the system that is most backward compatible. Microsoft dropped much of the DOS support in Windows 2000 and upwards (which made sense i think, DOS was getting old and technology is evolving), making some older programs not work properly, or even being unusable. In the later days we have DOSbox which is pretty damn good, but it is unfortunately not 100% perfect. I use Fast Tracker 2 (a music program) and there is a slight lag when using it unfortunately. Not that much though, but enough for me to notice it pretty good. I have an old PC running Windows 98SE though, where the DOS support is quite good, so no problem for me so far

A lot of this sounds great. The one thing I can't get past is how backward compatibility is being marginalized. Ever since I bought my first PS2, I've thought BC is easily one of the best features a console can have—the kind of feature that just makes sense to include in every machine because its benefits are so significant and obvious. Nobody needs to be told why it's a good thing that the PS2 supports PS1 games. Nobody needs to be convinced that it's convenient to be able to play your current-gen collection on your brand new console, or to play last-gen titles you missed. So how in the world did we reach a point where a company like Sony can treat BC like some useless gimmick without a major backlash from their customers?

I personally consider the absence of BC in any modern console an outrage, to the point where it's a major factor in my buying decisions. I feel like this should be a more common attitude. We intend to keep on playing the games we enjoy too much to sell, don't we? If so, surely it's not ideal to have to dust off and wire in a separate console every time we want to revisit an old title. As appealing as the PS4 seems based on current info, with BC it would be so much better.

A good post, but i wonder what could be done though. Not including backward compability are done for several of reasons. With the PS4 in specific, what could the consumers have done to make sure that the PS4 did have BC with PS3? What options would Sony have? Including PS3 hardware would increase the price, and then consumers would most likely complain about how expencive it was. Other thing would be to do 100% software emulation of the PS3, but is that possible at this point in time, and could the PS4 handle that?

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

PS3 BC is out of the question but what about PS2/1 BC. PS2 BC would be amazing.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

except you're forgetting that he's Mark fucking Cerny

This is a really good video. Thanks for sharing. Say what you want, but it is awesome that this guy led the design of the PS4, and has a new game coming as well.

 

[test_account]

PS3 BC is out of the question but what about PS2/1 BC. PS2 BC would be amazing.

I expect PS1 BC/emulation to work on the PS4. If not by using original PS1 discs, at least the digital download ones. PS2 BC should be possible technically i think, but i have my doubts about it being included in the PS4.

 

[thelastword]

Sony should make a seven hundred dollar PS4 SKU that is backwards compatible and on which they don't lose any money. If this is such a necessary feature, people should not have any problems paying for it. I know I would buy it like I did for the PS3 before they removed hardware BC altogether. For everybody else, offer a cheaper unit without BC.

You may find it crazy, but some people want full hardware bc and they also want it for peanuts too. At least you've highlighted your willingness to put the cash on the table, but some folks are simply more hot air than action.

 

[LeBoef]

i dont get this 4k talk. who needs that? until 4k tvs are common, everyone is going to shout for a new console since ps4/ xbox3 will be too old.

 

[IrishNinja]

^those PS4 eye shots might be threadworthy

You may find it crazy, but some people want full hardware bc and they also want it for peanuts too. At least you've highlighted your willingness to put the cash on the table, but some folks are simply more hot air than action.

agreed - id again pay $600 for the option, hypothetically - if we're talking full-on, proper hardware BC.

Thats looking at it a bit backwards (or what i shall call it) in my opinion. It would be similar to say that some people were celebrating because Nintendo didnt include more powerful hardware in the WiiU, and also not including multitouch for the 3DS and the WiiU. They werent celebrating these things, but they just dont see it as that big of a deal to them personally. If these things were included, i dont think anyone would complain about it. In the PS4 case, i think the celebration is because of the advantages that the new architecture will bring, not because of losing backward compability.

there's been a number of gaffers in a number of BC threads emphatically stating how much they do not care for BC, and are "glad" its not here. i'm grateful to have not seen as much of such from this thread, but similar attitudes have happened.

i mean, i quoted a few people who genuinely believe BC hampered sales and cost sony tons of money, both things ive no idea how they arrived at.

People are also not losing connection to 20 years of Sony library. I think i know what you mean, but i think it is important to point out that many people still have the original systems. And even if they dont have the older systems anymore, getting one used is no problem condering how many that are available at Ebay etc.. They could always have the connection if they want.

understood, but again, convenience aside, i see this as a poor answer to game preservation - libraries like the Saturn are largely lost to many, as an example. nevermind that the viability of OG phatty PS3's over extended amounts of time becomes worrisome.

that disconnect is the same one later PS3 adopters felt from PS2, and i think games like God of War 2 and Persona 3 in particular showed this.

We also dont know if PS4 wont have any backward compability at all. Sony hasnt ruled out this as far as i know. Personally i will be very surprised if at least not digital download PS1 games wont work. There should be no problem including this.

true, i don't see Gakai as a great answer but its something. as for PS1 titles on PSN, the PS+ ones for vita are nice but idea of rebuying a very limited # of titles as a substitute, where the system is very clearly powerful enough to play/emulate them from the disc, you can see where this also strikes me as not so great.

About no difference between physical and digital BC, i hope that most people (at least those who discuss this subject) are aware of this by now, that digital download stuff wont work either.

I'd hoped that too, but i assure you the mistake will be made in any large discussion on BC. i havent combed through this thread in particular but it's surprisingly frequent on here, given the expectations both of us have regarding the average gaffer on this subject.