Support NeoGAF

[KojiKnight]

Joke? The original PS3's had hardware based BC and then after PS3's had software based BC. Then they took that away, leaving nothing.

EDIT: Apologies if I'm missing something here.

PS3's "software" emulation of the PS2 was semi-hardware based (80GB models only software emulated the EE (CPU/VUs) of the PS2, it still had the graphics hardware soldered to the mother board).

The current implementation of emulation is very limited, requiring a lot of hand coded optimizations per game and being limited as to what games will work with it (which is why you can't just shove a PS2 disc into the system and play, the compatibility is so low, and the effort they have to put into optimization is why they sell them via the store).

As for emulating the PS3 on the PS4? Completely 100% out of the question, will never happen. Bookmark this post, bring it up in a few years to make me eat crow if you like, but emulation of the PS3 on the PS4 won't happen.

 

[Suzushiiro]

Joke? The original PS3's had hardware based BC and then after PS3's had software based BC. Then they took that away, leaving nothing.

EDIT: Apologies if I'm missing something here.

The software emulation was only for the CPU, actually- the GPU was still hardware emulation. If it was software emulaion for both they never would have had to remove it. They basically went from having an entire PS2 in there to half a PS2 to no PS2.

 

[Jomjom]

Can the PS4 really not read CDs of any kind-as in the laser assembly or whatever literally cannot do it? Because I see no other reason why the ps4 wouldn't be able to play the discs. My old android phone can play ps1 games almost perfectly.

 

[Imbarkus]

If they charged for an emulator, how do you think the creators of those old games would feel to find Sony was profiting off their old work while they aren't? You'd end up getting into a Netflix scenario where only certain titles are available for a limited time, require DRM checks, etc. I'm willing to bet they toyed with the idea, but decided against it after looking into the big picture.

What in the hell are you talking about with this metaphor? There is no Netflix parallel here, the parallel is DVDs or Blu-Rays. It's like you're from some alternate reality where the DIVX disc standard took hold...

Also, how am I the beggar? lol. I'm the fucking consumer. The companies are the ones begging.

Do I expect it? No. Should I just stop saying I want something just because people like you tell me it isn't feasible? Fuck that.

You tell 'em.

I don't dispute that buying digital can give you all these benefits and extra features and may be the right choice for some people.

But the only counter-argument I have heard for "why not both" seems like it comes from this resigned viewpoint... "oh, well, since they can double-charge me in this regard, I'll just yield my desires as a customer and not even expect or want something different."

I don't have a PS4. I might not buy a PS4. Right now, the primary competition for a PS4 for me is a better PC. Where I can emulate this shit all I want.

So the whole thing about profit motive is that, yes, it exists and yes, we should expect it. But it also exists in a long-term sense fostering good will and platform and brand loyalty. And it also exists in a short-term, cash-grab sense, that often has the opposite effect. And it's up to us as customers, as clients, to communicate to our provider which decision is which.

After all, we banded together pretty well to convey that message to Microsoft when XBox One DRM policies were first announced, right?

 

[Hitoribhoshi]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but to those saying I'd pay again for the PSN version of a PS1/2 I already own, isn't it like paying to play a version you will never "own" of something you already own?

 

[androvsky]

Can the PS4 really not read CDs of any kind-as in the laser assembly or whatever literally cannot do it? Because I see no other reason why the ps4 wouldn't be able to play the discs. My old android phone can play ps1 games almost perfectly.

The PS4 can read CDs. It's been confirmed in a Japanese interview with Mark Cerny from before launch, and based on my research DVD lasers can read CDs. Frequency doesn't matter for reading stamped mass-produced discs, what matters is being able to focus the laser to the correct size at the correct distance. DVD drives have a pretty adjustable focus range so that they can deal with dual-layer discs, and obviously they're already ahead of the game in terms of spot size. Early DVD drives didn't include a CD laser at all and could read stamped CDs just fine. Why virtually all drives include a CD laser is because it's the only way to read CD-Rs. They use a dye, so frequency (aka color) is important. Obviously that's not a huge deal for PS1 BC.

What I don't know:
1. If DVD lasers can read through the black layer on PS1 discs. It's apparently transparent to infrared, but DVD frequency is in the visible red.

2. If the PS4 doesn't actually have a CD laser. It's not listed on the spec sheets, but that's all the info I have. Considering how weird Sony was being about CD playback, there's no real telling. Unless someone did a teardown of the blu-ray drive on a PS4?

 

[Squalor]

Why should I care whether or not I'm in the minority?

Why should I care if people don't own the discs anymore?

Also, how am I the beggar? lol. I'm the fucking consumer. The companies are the ones begging. The consumer is the chooser here. That you have the mentality of a beggar is kind of sad.

Do I expect it? No. Should I just stop saying I want something just because people like you tell me it isn't feasible? Fuck that.

I don't have any beggar mentality. I said it would be cool to have both, but I'll take either. I also don't need backward compatibility on my PlayStation 4 since I own a working PlayStation 2 and 3.

Sony isn't beholden to give you backward compatibility. You're begging for the feature to work in a way that suits a niche group you happen to be in.

In business, majorities win most of the time. That's just how it is.

After all, we banded together pretty well to convey that message to Microsoft when XBox One DRM policies were first announced, right?

That was a majority. PlayStation- and PlayStation 2-disc-based backward compatibility is a minority.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Sony can print "Your Welcome" as tag line on their Playstation ads all year long and I wouldn't bat an eye.

It would annoy the fuck out of me if they signed off every advert with that.

 

[Squalor]

Sony can print "Your Welcome" as tag line on their Playstation ads all year long and I wouldn't bat an eye.

It would annoy the fuck out of me if they signed off every advert with that.

Let us hope Sony would not be that grammatically incorrect.

 

[Skilletor]

I don't have any beggar mentality. I said it would be cool to have both, but I'll take either. I also don't need backward compatibility on my PlayStation 4 since I own a working PlayStation 2 and 3.

Sony isn't beholden to give you backward compatibility. You're begging for the feature to work in a way that suits a niche group you happen to be in.

In business, majorities win most of the time. That's just how it is.

That was a majority. PlayStation- and PlayStation 2-disc-based backward compatibility is a minority.

I never said Sony needed to do this. I'm not begging for the feature to work. We don't know how it's going to work. All you're saying is that we shouldn't hope things we've already bought will work with an emulator they're developing. I'm expressing a desire, a hope, that I will be able to use the discs I've already paid money for. I'm expressing a desire that I be able to play games on an official emulator that may not ever be released digitally. As I've posted numerous times in this thread, I already have multiple ways to play all of my games. Since this is all speculation, I don't see why people are taking issue with the request that we be able to use our discs.

 

[Cthulhu_Steev]

Let us hope Sony would not be that grammatically incorrect.

"It plays all of your PS1 and PS2 disc's!"

 

[Doran902]

Be nice to play FF12 and Here Comes the Pain without having to hook up my ps2. Phat ps3 died.

 

[zenosparadox]

If this is a "local" software emulation solution that supports PS1 and PS2 discs, then how does Sony make money off it? It would be an incredible gesture of good will to put it out there, but relatively few people would take a advantage of it, I think. If it cost anything, then it would either be a service ($/month, possibly discounted/free for PS+ people), a one-time cost (pay for an emulator) or would cost $/title (which would be stupid because people who already own the disc are not going to want to pay more for each game they want to play).

Or it is just a way to play your PSN purchases locally without the latency associated with streaming via Gaikai.

Is there any kind of majority or group consensus on what people think this will be?

 

[RedSwirl]

First, sorry about replying late, was away from Gaf.


Now, the "evidence" is simply what Sony has been doing throughout last gen: re-selling PS1/2 games on PSN while phasing out console BC.

They were generating revenue from people buying (or re-buying) their PS1/2 games to play on PSP / PS3 / Vita.

Outside of Internet goodwill, there is absolutely no reason why they would suddenly cripple this source of income by allowing you to simply play the disk version you already own.

Then you factor in the third party publishers who own many of the popular IPs from the PS1/2 heyday. Just look at how many weeks FFVII has spent as the best-selling PSone classic on PSN.

Let's be reasonable here.

You know all PS3s can play PS1 discs right?

Sony was able to sell PS1 classics on PSN despite the fact that customers could also just play their old discs. The only concrete reason we have for Sony locking out PS2 disc compatibility is because most of the games don't run properly on slim PS3s.

The market for old physical games really doesn't kill Sony's ability to resell digital copies at all. Many of the physical games are already so rare and expensive that only the most hardcore still use them. They're probably outnumbered by the people who would just re-buy the games anyway. Plus, Sony can sell the digital games for much cheaper than their physical versions. And because it would likely take more effort for Sony to lock out discs than to allow them, it doesn't really make sense to go the extra mile to lock them out.

There's really very little business reason for Sony to lock out discs.

 

[Skilletor]

If this is a "local" software emulation solution that supports PS1 and PS2 discs, then how does Sony make money off it? It would be an incredible gesture of good will to put it out there, but relatively few people would take a advantage of it, I think. If it cost anything, then it would either be a service ($/month, possibly discounted/free for PS+ people), a one-time cost (pay for an emulator) or would cost $/title (which would be stupid because people who already own the disc are not going to want to pay more for each game they want to play).

Or it is just a way to play your PSN purchases locally without the latency associated with streaming via Gaikai.

Is there any kind of majority or group consensus on what people think this will be?

How does Sony make money off of PS1 games when every ps3 can play them?

 

[RedSwirl]

If this is a "local" software emulation solution that supports PS1 and PS2 discs, then how does Sony make money off it? It would be an incredible gesture of good will to put it out there, but relatively few people would take a advantage of it, I think. If it cost anything, then it would either be a service ($/month, possibly discounted/free for PS+ people), a one-time cost (pay for an emulator) or would cost $/title (which would be stupid because people who already own the disc are not going to want to pay more for each game they want to play).

Or it is just a way to play your PSN purchases locally without the latency associated with streaming via Gaikai.

Is there any kind of majority or group consensus on what people think this will be?

"Local" means both PSN purchases and potentially discs. All it means is that you won't be streaming the games, but that they'll run locally on your PS4.

 

[zenosparadox]

How does Sony make money off of PS1 games when every ps3 can play them?

Sony included PS1 and PS2 backward compatibility when designing the PS3, so obviously they thought those features would be beneficial to transition people from the older to the newer generation. This is different because the PS4 has already launched and virtually no one has been clamoring for PS1/PS2 backward compatibility for this system.

Also, thanks for answering my question with a question rather than putting some real thought into the discussion.

 

[androvsky]

If this is a "local" software emulation solution that supports PS1 and PS2 discs, then how does Sony make money off it? It would be an incredible gesture of good will to put it out there, but relatively few people would take a advantage of it, I think. If it cost anything, then it would either be a service ($/month, possibly discounted/free for PS+ people), a one-time cost (pay for an emulator) or would cost $/title (which would be stupid because people who already own the disc are not going to want to pay more for each game they want to play).

Or it is just a way to play your PSN purchases locally without the latency associated with streaming via Gaikai.

Is there any kind of majority or group consensus on what people think this will be?

Sony makes money selling games, and the PS1/PS2 catalog is a huge resource of said games. In order to sell them, Sony has to have an emulator that works with as many games as possible, so that any publisher can simply submit their games for sale on PSN so Sony can take their 30% cut.

As a side effect, virtually everything Sony needs to do in order to support the discs people already own has already been done. If the number of people that still own all the PS1 and PS2 discs that they'll want to play is as small as many say, then it doesn't hurt Sony at all to enable the playback of discs to make those few but likely vocal people happy. The real money is in selling the games on PSN. Sony might want to hedge their bets by charging a small fee for the emulator to play discs, but I don't think anyone, including Sony, will be particularly bothered either way. Even people who own the discs have been known to double-dip on games they love just to have a copy they can have on the hard drive ready to be played at any time.

One thing Sony does have to watch for with disc playback is that there are legitimate pressed PS2 discs that allow unsigned code to be run by design, like Codebreaker and things like that. I'm sure their emulator security will be enough to prevent the PS4 itself from being hacked through it, but they'll have to put some effort into preventing people from installing HD Loader on the virtual PS2 hard drive and just dumping a bunch of downloaded ISOs on the system. That apparently happened with the PS3's BC.

 

[Night Hunter]

You know all PS3s can play PS1 discs right?

Sony was able to sell PS1 classics on PSN despite the fact that customers could also just play their old discs. The only concrete reason we have for Sony locking out PS2 disc compatibility is because most of the games don't run properly on slim PS3s.

The market for old physical games really doesn't kill Sony's ability to resell digital copies at all. Many of the physical games are already so rare and expensive that only the most hardcore still use them. They're probably outnumbered by the people who would just re-buy the games anyway. Plus, Sony can sell the digital games for much cheaper than their physical versions. And because it would likely take more effort for Sony to lock out discs than to allow them, it doesn't really make sense to go the extra mile to lock them out.

There's really very little business reason for Sony to lock out discs.

.

 

[WalkMan]

Sony included PS1 and PS2 backward compatibility when designing the PS3, so obviously they thought those features would be beneficial to transition people from the older to the newer generation. This is different because the PS4 has already launched and virtually no one has been clamoring for PS1/PS2 backward compatibility for this system.

Also, thanks for answering my question with a question rather than putting some real thought into the discussion.

By the end of the PS2-era, the PS1 emulator in it was fully software. So it made sense to port the software over to the PS3. Full software emulation for the PS2 never made it to the PS3, but all of the bottlenecks (eDRAM) are no longer an issue so I can imagine a more full emulator for PS4.

I'd argue the inclusion of PS3 emulation by saying there's a huge intersection between this and the previous generation - but for PS1/PS2 inclusion it's more winning mindshare. If you're going to release the previous PS1/PS2 games again, you might as well allow access to disc read. It's a value-added to be able to say that the games you purchased 20 years ago will work today. It'd also tie in with their support of allowing used games, hypocrisy if they disallow local play.

 

[crinale]

In Sony's defense they just can't decide to not to lock out disks by themselves.
By looking what happened to UMD passport program (in Japan only I suppose)
not all third parties are happy with disk-based BC.

Edit: I meant if the BC adds some value (from addition of right-analog to up-res-ing like this rumored case),
the real intention of third party would be that they'd rather want to re-sell it, with like HD-Remaster sticker on it.

 

[RadarScope1]

You know all PS3s can play PS1 discs right?

Sony was able to sell PS1 classics on PSN despite the fact that customers could also just play their old discs. The only concrete reason we have for Sony locking out PS2 disc compatibility is because most of the games don't run properly on slim PS3s.

The market for old physical games really doesn't kill Sony's ability to resell digital copies at all. Many of the physical games are already so rare and expensive that only the most hardcore still use them. They're probably outnumbered by the people who would just re-buy the games anyway. Plus, Sony can sell the digital games for much cheaper than their physical versions. And because it would likely take more effort for Sony to lock out discs than to allow them, it doesn't really make sense to go the extra mile to lock them out.

There's really very little business reason for Sony to lock out discs.

I think a lot of us are with you here, but how often do we see companies take the route that doesn't make sense? Way too often. I don't disagree with this post but I also just don't see it happening. Would love to be wrong, though.

 

[fernoca]

Expecting it for the digital PSone and PS2 Classics you already own digitally. With 1080p been an option across all games, but with some having problems and they having a list of all games; with check-marks next to which supports 1080p without problems, and "reported problems" next to the ones that don't work properly.

 

[Flame Lord]

I always kind of hoped that if they did the streaming PS1 and 2 (and I guess 3?) they would let you stream for free as long as you had a copy of the game in the drive. Not sure how likely that is to happen though.

 

[OmahaG8]

PS3's "software" emulation of the PS2 was semi-hardware based (80GB models only software emulated the EE (CPU/VUs) of the PS2, it still had the graphics hardware soldered to the mother board).

The current implementation of emulation is very limited, requiring a lot of hand coded optimizations per game and being limited as to what games will work with it (which is why you can't just shove a PS2 disc into the system and play, the compatibility is so low, and the effort they have to put into optimization is why they sell them via the store).

As for emulating the PS3 on the PS4? Completely 100% out of the question, will never happen. Bookmark this post, bring it up in a few years to make me eat crow if you like, but emulation of the PS3 on the PS4 won't happen.

Thanks for clarification. I don't and never thought the PS3 could be emulated on the PS4. Even if it did (it won't) I won't rub it in your face.

The software emulation was only for the CPU, actually- the GPU was still hardware emulation. If it was software emulaion for both they never would have had to remove it. They basically went from having an entire PS2 in there to half a PS2 to no PS2.

I didn't realize that, that makes more sense. I always thought the later PS3's with no BC was just Sony being dicks. Really glad my 60gb PS3 still works great. But I hardly use it anymore anyway. . .

 

[rokkerkory]

If PS4 could play PS3 games via gaikai or other means, I'd prob jump in this year.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I'd imagine it's an online based emulator via PS Now that has the ability to emulate physical and downloaded games via networked/always online software, pretty much.

Seems like that's what Sony is going to do when PS Now launches.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

I own PS1 titles digitally that I also own physically (literally 1 foot away from the ps3). Most of the reason I purchased those was to play them on PSP.

If the PS4 can play digital PS2 titles, then great. If PS4 can stream those Digital PS2 titles to my Vita, then that's a reason for me to double dip. Being able to play video games while my son or wife watch TV is very nice.


Disc Compatibility is the dream, and I REALLY hope that it is available. There will always be titles that will not reappear on the PSN store (Lunar 2, Suikoden 2, Brave Fencer Musashi (in English at least) Star Ocean 2, and Dragon Warrior 7 come to mind) and I would love to be able to continue playing them.

 

[kewlmyc]

Eh, sure. I'd be game as long as SMT games, Odin Sphere, and God Hand was included.

 

[Z3M0G]

If I can't play these, I don't care.

(not my pic)

 

[level44]

I always kind of hoped that if they did the streaming PS1 and 2 (and I guess 3?) they would let you stream for free as long as you had a copy of the game in the drive. Not sure how likely that is to happen though.

That would be like Netflix saying oh you can stream this movie for free if you have the DVD in your disc drive. Won't happen.

 

[BradleyLove]

People pushing and trying to rationalize disc-based BC for media the PS4 can't physically play (CDs) are in for disappointment.

No CD audio playback is not the same as being unable to read CDs.

It'll come in the form of PS Now and traditional downloads on the PSN. There is no fiscal incentive for disc based backwards compatibility and PSN versions are more likely to support trophies and other modern perks, as they aren't static data like discs. The last all-encompassing hardware emulated Sony console cost $599.

That's "why not both."

BC PS3s had the PS2 GPU (and CPU in early PS3s) chip in the PS3. That's what helped drive up the cost (in addition to BD, XDR, etc).

A fully software-based form of BC has no impact on unit cost of PS4.

 

[RedSwirl]

I'd imagine it's an online based emulator via PS Now that has the ability to emulate physical and downloaded games via networked/always online software, pretty much.

Seems like that's what Sony is going to do when PS Now launches.

The reason local emulation makes more sense (local meaning not streaming, which is what all the sources have said) is because for PS1 and PS2 games it probably takes up less of Sony's bandwidth. Downloading a PS1 game from PSN is a one-time download of at most 1.5GB, a PS2 game at most 5GB (usually much lower). Constantly streaming the game whenever someone wants to play it would be a lot more expensive on Sony's end.

 

[KalBalboa]

No CD audio playback is not the same as being unable to read CDs.

Not having the ability to read CD Rom audio alone is a substantial hurdle. Many PlayStation games use CD audio for music/VO files.

Tony Hawk, Twisted Metal, Sled Storm. Off the top of my head.

Exiting this thread before it grows even more toxic, or at least until there's more information thrown out there. By then there's likely to be a new thread, though.

 

[Haeralis The BRave]

BC PS3s had the PS2 GPU (and CPU in early PS3s) chip in the PS3. That's what helped drive up the cost (in addition to BD, XDR, etc).

Its like 7 years later, and people still spread this blatant misinformation. The launch PS3s did not cost $600 because of BC. It was because of Blu-Ray. Look at the manufacturing costs:

It only cost $27 to include BC for the PS2.

 

[A Twisty Fluken]

if "being realistic" is expecting sony will not support the mountain of discs that i bought because they're a business, then it's also realistic to not want to buy a PS4 until it's got a pile of must-have exclusive games because i'm a consumer and see much more value in a box that leverages the games that i already own

 

[Imbarkus]

if "being realistic" is expecting sony will not support the mountain of discs that i bought because they're a business, then it's also realistic to not want to buy a PS4 until it's got a pile of must-have exclusive games because i'm a consumer and see much more value in a box that leverages the games that i already own

Yep. Or put that money towards a quality PC instead and you can have access to the best versions of current releases, all the back catalog of PC games you can get your hands on (and get running) or want to buy through gog or steam (updated to run on your OS), PLUS emulate whatever CD and DVD-based console back catalog you want...

...and let Microsoft make a percentage off each device sold.

If Playstation as a brand wants to think big and compete against PC as a platform it will embrace that legacy both through disc support AND upgraded digital releases, along with the Playstation Now implementation for PS3 titles. There's no solid reason not to, because there's no evidence it would prevent digital sales, and it is foolhardy to leave that competitive advantage to the PC platform.

 

[Muffdraul]

Its like 7 years later, and people still spread this blatant misinformation. The launch PS3s did not cost $600 because of BC. It was because of Blu-Ray. Look at the manufacturing costs:

It only cost $27 to include BC for the PS2.

I always assumed Sony's motive in pulling PS2 BC from models going forward was some high level exec in a meeting going "Um, hello, idiots? Aren't we still trying to maintain a relatively high level of PS2 console sales even post PS3 launch? So why the fuck are we giving our consumers a reason not to buy a PS2? Yank that BC, now."

 

[Hades Hotgun]

Just as a hypothetical, lets say Sony decides to announce the specifics of PSNow at E3... and they opt to reveal their PS1/PS2 plans as part of that.

If they just launch PSNow with a handful of PS3 games, then the service doesn't come off as all that attractive to start with. That doesn't mean they won't do it (PSPlus didn't seem so great at launch either) but it seems unlikely to me that they are waiting for a big reveal with relatively few titles on offer, all hinging on streaming.

My thought is that they will announce PS1/PS2 backwards compatibility as part of the general PSNow full reveal, in order to make the overall offer seem more robust.

What we have are essentially a handful of scenarios with various likelihoods of happening.



PSNow for PS3 games, Local Emulation for PS1 and PS2 seems to be the prevailing viewpoint based on recent leaks and rumors.


So then, what will Sony offer?


1. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 and PS1 disc and digital BC.

2. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 digital only BC, PS1 disc and digital BC.

3. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 and PS1 digital only BC

4. PS3, PS2, PS1, all through PSNow (all require subscription, even with local emu)


Is there any other possibility that I am missing?

Personally I think it is between 1 and 2. I think it would be very odd for Sony to not allow disc based playback on PS1 games, given the ease with which such a function could be implemented.

From a business stand point I don't think that offering the incredibly limited library of PS2 classics makes as attractive a selling point as full disc based emulation of a massive library. If people think the number of folks looking for disc based BC is small, how big do they think the potential market for the pittance of PS2 classics is?

 

[pooptest]

Just as a hypothetical, lets say Sony decides to announce the specifics of PSNow at E3... and they opt to reveal their PS1/PS2 plans as part of that.

If they just launch PSNow with a handful of PS3 games, then the service doesn't come off as all that attractive to start with. That doesn't mean they won't do it (PSPlus didn't seem so great at launch either) but it seems unlikely to me that they are waiting for a big reveal with relatively few titles on offer, all hinging on streaming.

My thought is that they will announce PS1/PS2 backwards compatibility as part of the general PSNow full reveal, in order to make the overall offer seem more robust.

What we have are essentially a handful of scenarios with various likelihoods of happening.



PSNow for PS3 games, Local Emulation for PS1 and PS2 seems to be the prevailing viewpoint based on recent leaks and rumors.


So then, what will Sony offer?


1. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 and PS1 disc and digital BC.

2. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 digital only BC, PS1 disc and digital BC.

3. PS3 via PSNow, PS2 and PS1 digital only BC

4. PS3, PS2, PS1, all through PSNow (all require subscription, even with local emu)


Is there any other possibility that I am missing?

Personally I think it is between 1 and 2. I think it would be very odd for Sony to not allow disc based playback on PS1 games, given the ease with which such a function could be implemented.

From a business stand point I don't think that offering the incredibly limited library of PS2 classics makes as attractive a selling point as full disc based emulation of a massive library. If people think the number of folks looking for disc based BC is small, how big do they think the potential market for the pittance of PS2 classics is?

Here's what I'm thinking

Spoiler

hoping

... BC for PS1/PS2 games via emulation and selling / subscription-based PS1/PS2 games on PSNow, along with PS3 games.

Some people, in preparation for PS3 and even PS4 have sold a lot of their PS1/PS2 physical copies so that's where they'll get a good chunk of $ for older titles on PSNow. Some people have also sold their PS3's in preparation/at release for PS4 and that's where they'll get a good chunk of $ for PS3 games.

This is obviously speculation, but it would be nice. I retained all my physical PS1/PS2 games, but not everyone has. And not everyone has physical copies of games they wanted to play back then and cost $$$ for. Tales of Destiny, anyone? I have a retail copy, but if I didn't and wanted to play the game, I'd rather pay a sub fee for PSNow (assuming it's sub-based) or maybe it's $5-7.99 on PSNow. Either way, it's still cheaper than buying it on eBay for $50+

 

[BradleyLove]

Not having the ability to read CD Rom audio alone is a substantial hurdle. Many PlayStation games use CD audio for music/VO files.

Tony Hawk, Twisted Metal, Sled Storm. Off the top of my head.

Not insurmountable. An option would be to "install" the CD to PS4's HDD. But it's not an issue anyway; CD playback is coming in a future firmware update.

Its like 7 years later, and people still spread this blatant misinformation. The launch PS3s did not cost $600 because of BC. It was because of Blu-Ray. Look at the manufacturing costs:
It only cost $27 to include BC for the PS2.

It's also like you didn't read my post correctly.... hint... what do you think "BD" and "XDR" is?

 

[Imbarkus]

I must begrudgingly admit that I would pay a PSNow subscription fee if it included access to emulator software on PS4 for my library of disc-based games.

I would consider it reasonable that such a service would need to be continually subsidized in order to continually fine-tune the software emulation.

My experience with any emulation is that it must be continually fine-tuned and iterated and updated, and that this process is an enormous timesink. If the service of PSNow included the "making playable" of this stuff, much like gog.com or Steam does for classic PC games, I think it would be a smart move.

A #gamechanger for me, really.

 

[RubenCordeiro]

PS3 games is missing.
Damn

Emulation of PS3 games would be extremely hard, even for high end pc's.

 

[213372bu]

Why should I care whether or not I'm in the minority?

Why should I care if people don't own the discs anymore?

Also, how am I the beggar? lol. I'm the fucking consumer. The companies are the ones begging. The consumer is the chooser here. That you have the mentality of a beggar is kind of sad.

Do I expect it? No. Should I just stop saying I want something just because people like you tell me it isn't feasible? Fuck that.

If only you could give high-fives on the internet. 100% with you on this.

 

[HitCtrlAltDel]

I highly doubt that PSNOW will support PS1 or PS2 games. The amount of hardware needed to support such a service vs the amount of user playing time would be severely out of balance. Old games just aren't played as much as newer ones are. They already have a PS1 emulator, that can be ported. They already have a lot of custom PS2 emualtion code to run various PS2 games on PS3. It makes sense to make that more generic and support the whole library.

So my vote is:
PS1 disc and digital PSN ISO support
PS2 disc and digital PSN ISO support
PS3 only supported through PSNOW service

 

[Korezo]

I'll only care for this if it's with physical ps1/ps2 games and free. If it's not I'll stay using the emulators on pc which will probably have better compatibility and be better over all.

 

[Game Guru]

Here's what I'm thinking

Spoiler

hoping

... BC for PS1/PS2 games via emulation and selling / subscription-based PS1/PS2 games on PSNow, along with PS3 games.

Some people, in preparation for PS3 and even PS4 have sold a lot of their PS1/PS2 physical copies so that's where they'll get a good chunk of $ for older titles on PSNow. Some people have also sold their PS3's in preparation/at release for PS4 and that's where they'll get a good chunk of $ for PS3 games.

This is obviously speculation, but it would be nice. I retained all my physical PS1/PS2 games, but not everyone has. And not everyone has physical copies of games they wanted to play back then and cost $$$ for. Tales of Destiny, anyone? I have a retail copy, but if I didn't and wanted to play the game, I'd rather pay a sub fee for PSNow (assuming it's sub-based) or maybe it's $5-7.99 on PSNow. Either way, it's still cheaper than buying it on eBay for $50+

What will most likely happen is that PS1 & PS2 games are offered alongside PS3 games with the subscription to PS Now, but PS1 & PS2 games will also be offered for sale on PSN as part of PSOne Classics and PSTwo Classics which are naturally cross-buy with Vita, PS3 and PSP where applicable. PS1 and PS2 games will be offered both through PS Now and through their Cross-Buy, but both will be played locally.

As for disc support, I can imagine Sony being like... "Yes, you could use your physical PS1 and PS2 games on the PS4 because we care about our most loyal customers, but with PS Now and through cross-buy, you can play your digital PS1 & PS2 titles on both PS4 and PS Vita." You see, there are ways to make digital content more appealing than disc-based ones while still offering disc-based options and that is through being hardware agnostic with digital titles.

 

[Fine Ham Abounds]

It certainly seemed like Sony developed a software emulation package on PS3 for PS2 games, but they still chose not to give people access to it in any other form than by purchasing digital copies of a handful of PS2 games, so I'm really not expecting them to offer being able to play PS1 or PS2 games without some kind of paywall in this case.

The only thing possibly up in the air is whether something you've already got in your library would be cross-buy between PS3 and PS4 and immediately downloadable and playable on your PS4 the day this goes live. Part of me thinks they wouldn't be so generous, but they left PS+ account-based and not console-specific, so who knows.

 

[Moosichu]

It certainly seemed like Sony developed a software emulation package on PS3 for PS2 games, but they still chose not to give people access to it in any other form than by purchasing digital copies of a handful of PS2 games, so I'm really not expecting them to offer being able to play PS1 or PS2 games without some kind of paywall in this case.

The only thing possibly up in the air is whether something you've already got in your library would be cross-buy between PS3 and PS4 and immediately downloadable and playable on your PS4 the day this goes live. Part of me thinks they wouldn't be so generous, but they left PS+ account-based and not console-specific, so who knows.

The ps3 ps2 emulator only works on sone titles as said by people in this thread

 

[Hades Hotgun]

The ps3 ps2 emulator only works on sone titles as said by people in this thread

And this is my big concern. Even with the added power of the PS4, it could be that the emulator is too unreliable for Sony to allow disc based support when the library is so huge and the possibility of many games not working correctly seems high. It could be a situation where support for the PS2 classics is improved, but overall they don't want to open the system to a bunch of games being unplayable.

On the other hand, I think if they can reach a certain level of functionality it would make sense to simply allow disc based BC but with a disclaimer that some games will not function correctly. I believe they did something like that, albeit on a much smaller scale, with the PS2 slims not playing select PS1 games.