-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Sessler's Soapbox: Who Cares About Backwards Compatibility?
- Thread starter magus
- Start date
RedNumberFive
Banned
Tom Penny said:
Oh no you didn't...
fatigues_gasolini
Member
pivot said:
Bravo Junior, Bravo
jay said:
It's not bending over backward to explain a simple business concept. They're the ones with the numbers and they don't agree that BC is worth the money it costs to implement. My own personal experience suggests this is correct. The number of people who would only buy a console if it were BC is insignificant.
Cat in the Hat
Member
Stop yelling, it's hurting my earsUT66 said:
Nice to test out what games looked like with the quick filters, but I only played SoTC for maybe a day and never used it again. I had an OG 20GB and now an MGS4 80GB, never used PS2 BC. Then again, I haven't played anything at all recently, but I have no desire to play any PS2 games.
I just watched the video, and again I disagree with Adam Sessler.
I disagree that wanting a particular feature in a game console is a sign of having a sense of entitlement. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are businesses, and to sell their products, they needs to provide goods that people want to purchase (or generate a need, but that's a different subject). If people want backwards compatibility, then to sell the console, the company needs to have backwards compatibility as a feature in the console. They might be able to sell the console without it, but that could mean at the cost of consumer loyalty and/or trust.
A DRM-laden download that must be purchased again is not consumer-friendly for those who already have the game. Retouching may be appreciated by even the most rabid of DRM-loathing gamers, but it doesn't mean that would be preferred over backwards compatibility.
Barring the actual total remakes of movies, DVD editions are frequently retooled and sold as a new edition (often called "double dipping" by collectors). Some have gone so far as to avoid buying the first edition because they know the second, enhanced version isn't too far behind. Repackaging isn't liked in the other entertainment industries any more than it is in the gaming market.
I disagree that wanting a particular feature in a game console is a sign of having a sense of entitlement. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are businesses, and to sell their products, they needs to provide goods that people want to purchase (or generate a need, but that's a different subject). If people want backwards compatibility, then to sell the console, the company needs to have backwards compatibility as a feature in the console. They might be able to sell the console without it, but that could mean at the cost of consumer loyalty and/or trust.
A DRM-laden download that must be purchased again is not consumer-friendly for those who already have the game. Retouching may be appreciated by even the most rabid of DRM-loathing gamers, but it doesn't mean that would be preferred over backwards compatibility.
Barring the actual total remakes of movies, DVD editions are frequently retooled and sold as a new edition (often called "double dipping" by collectors). Some have gone so far as to avoid buying the first edition because they know the second, enhanced version isn't too far behind. Repackaging isn't liked in the other entertainment industries any more than it is in the gaming market.
KHarvey16 said:
So as Sony's top analyst you were against the PS3's production immediately after its standing became clear as it's a basic business principle that products should make companies money?
People justify what companies do and justify what companies don't do even when these justifications are at odds with each other.
Torquill
Member
What the fuck is with all the people bringing up having to re-buy games? What the hell are y'all talking about? No one is making you buy shit. The release of the PS3 doesn't cause your PS2 to cease functioning. This shit was never even an issue when I was a kid. If you wanted to play an NES game, you hooked up the gd NES.
Yes, BC is nice, handy, and convenient as hell. But don't start acting like anyone's making you buy a damn thing.
Yes, BC is nice, handy, and convenient as hell. But don't start acting like anyone's making you buy a damn thing.
speculawyer said:
Thats a pretty poor argument no?
There are a number of features included that make the console more expensive not everybody needs or uses. Take Wireless online gaming for example - In a lot of cases its actually worse than a wired connection and you can bet a hell of a lot of people don't use it.
Should they strip that feature as well? After all its making the system more expensive for the rest of us......
My personal opinion about BC is that it should be an absolute must as long as the console is using the same type of media as the previous. Many people bring up the fact that you can just go out and buy older systems to play older games yet the very same people go out and replace their older PS3 model with a slim because of ''space issues''.
That being said I would rather have no BC than a half baked one - Still no fucking Strangers Wrath support on 360!!! Its a crime.
jay said:
That's not a valid comparison at all. BC is a feature and the PS3 is the entire product. Sure perhaps you could sell the BC versions of the PS3 until the investment in BC made sense(as costs drop and turn the equation into a more favorable one), but you do so at the cost of cutting BC and having that benefit go toward the profitability of the PS3 now as opposed to later.
Simply ending PS3 production guarantees that whatever losses the have accrued up till now will be the best they can hope for.
TrAcEr_x90
Member
Picked up my 60 gig with the god of wars and shadow of the colussus early on when there wasn't a big selection of ps3 games. Played through those games and ICO and haven't really put in a ps2 game since.
Dragona Akehi
Retired
vireland said:
The upper end that analysts would speculate was 10-20$ tops. Definitely a bad strategy.
KHarvey16 said:
Yes but simply ceasing PS3 production years ago quite possibly could have saved the company from more losses. You're acting as if it's common wisdom that when a product sells poorly the solution is to always keep selling it. It's quite likely they recoup some losses but it's unclear to me if they will recoup more than they could've saved by killing the system quickly.
xS1TH L0RDx
Banned
<3 backwards compatibility, <3 launch 60gig ps3
never owned a ps2 so I missed out on some absolutely amazing games (metal gear, kingdom hearts, final fantasy, god of war, yakuza, jak, ratchet...) that I thankfully got to play on my ps3.
never owned a ps2 so I missed out on some absolutely amazing games (metal gear, kingdom hearts, final fantasy, god of war, yakuza, jak, ratchet...) that I thankfully got to play on my ps3.
RedNumberFive
Banned
Full Recovery said:
This boggles my mind. You would sell a console with MORE features, for one with less features just because it's smaller? I could understand it if you made some huge profit, but I'm guessing that's not the case.
JORMBO
Darkness no more
Don't need it this Gen. My launch PS2 has never had any problems.
My 360 is a piece of junk. MS better have it in the 720 because I know the 360 is going to die and leave me with a bunch of games. That's assuming I even want to buy their next system after all the troubles I've had with the current one.
My 360 is a piece of junk. MS better have it in the 720 because I know the 360 is going to die and leave me with a bunch of games. That's assuming I even want to buy their next system after all the troubles I've had with the current one.
bonesmccoy
Banned
Torquill said:
+1
My NES games didn't work in my SNES, and my SNES games didn't work in my N64!
Shogun PaiN said:
But.. the PS2 uses DVDs, and the PS3 uses the BR. It's nay the same, unless 'cartridge-based' is an acceptable way to describe the aforementioned Nintendo generations that no one expected to include baccawadscompitibilly.
Lulz @ anyone really thinks that BC is going to matter more than a rat's dick to anyone looking to pick up a PS3 Slim now. Back in 2006 in was an issue, but it's almost 2010 you sluts!
OldJadedGamer
Banned
The best selling system last gen and the current best selling system this gen both have full BC with their previous systems.
Also, to the people crying "just buy a PS2" don't forget that BC on the PS3 gives you:
Also, to the people crying "just buy a PS2" don't forget that BC on the PS3 gives you:
- Upscaling on all games to 1080p
- Wireless wifi for all network games
- Wireless controllers
- Unlimited memory card space (current PS2 mem card is $25 bucks still)
- Built in multi-tap with up to 7 players locally
leroy hacker
Member
Linkzg said:
That's news to Sony:
"If you look at our competitors, one machine has zero backwards compatibility and one only has it with a third of their games," said Jack Tretton.
leroy hacker
Member
Torquill said:
My 21 year old NES still works. My 8 year old PS2 doesn't(pretty much). That's why it's an issue for some of us.
outunderthestars
Banned
BC matters to me because the girlfriend won't let me keep a pile of consoles attached to the tv.
I don't understand why Sony cannot simply offer a premium version of the PS3 that offers backwards compatibility, larger HDD, etc. Why should I have to have a gimped system simply because other people are cheap?
I don't understand why Sony cannot simply offer a premium version of the PS3 that offers backwards compatibility, larger HDD, etc. Why should I have to have a gimped system simply because other people are cheap?
Halftime report
Some of us want BC back in the PS3 and wouldn't mind paying more because: higher value > lower price (naturally)
Some of us tearfully accept SCE's decision to drop BC because: lower price > higher value (naturally)
Some of us actually take up our precious home space with an additional 9" x 6" x 1" behemoth because:
paying $99 for that hulking monstrosity > o noez how will i play my $3000 worth of PS2 games now
The rest own 60gigs etc. and are here for the lulz
More as it unfolds
Some of us want BC back in the PS3 and wouldn't mind paying more because: higher value > lower price (naturally)
Some of us tearfully accept SCE's decision to drop BC because: lower price > higher value (naturally)
Some of us actually take up our precious home space with an additional 9" x 6" x 1" behemoth because:
paying $99 for that hulking monstrosity > o noez how will i play my $3000 worth of PS2 games now
The rest own 60gigs etc. and are here for the lulz
More as it unfolds
OldJadedGamer
Banned
magus said:
But the Wii/DS/PSP doesn't have Ethernet. If someone doesn't have access to wifi then they are stuck buying an expensive dongle for the Wii... they should have just added Ethernet, I doubt it's that expensive.
stephendedalus
Member
magus said:
$99 USD. Maybe it is cheaper in theory, but now I can't play 360 online. Shrug.
DoomGyver
Member
I don't need the BC/usb slots/SD card slots/linux anymore so why not?RedNumberFive said:This boggles my mind. You would sell a console with MORE features, for one with less features just because it's smaller? I could understand it if you made some huge profit, but I'm guessing that's not the case.
Degen said:
Anyone who wants a BC PS3 should be looking for them right now on ebay and such. I somehow doubt that people are actually doing that because what they really want is the new hotness Slim with BC. Cest la vie. If people want it, go out and get it. <shrugs>