Sony Exec on Backwards Compatibility: Highly Requested, but Rarely Used

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
PlayStation 4 backwards compatibility support trails behind the Xbox One, and that isn’t going to change any time soon: PS Europe boss Jim Ryan claims that nobody plays old games that much, despite the fact that gamers’ requests suggest the opposite. Unlike the competition, Sony requires you to stream games via PlayStation Now or re-buy them in digital format. Do you think backwards compatibility is overrated?

The PlayStation 4 does not offer the kind of backwards compatibility support that the Xbox One does, and it sounds like that won't change soon, if comments from a top exec are anything to go on. In a new interview, PlayStation Europe boss Jim Ryan said backwards compatibility is a much-requested, little-used feature. "When we've dabbled with backwards compatibility, I can say it is one of those features that is much requested, but not actually used much.”
 
I like backwards compatibility, but he's not wrong. Rather, backwards compatibility is mostly useful for the first year or two after a console has come out, to allow it to have a higher game total until a new generation of games come out.

But I'm not a fan of PlayStation Now, or rereleases. Companies should allow people who own a game not to have to repurchase it.
 
I think it's overrated. It's really nice when console generations change and the new console doesn't have a huge library to rely on the previous console to play. But as the system gets more mature, the bonus/appeal playing older titles diminishes.

Plus, for the most part, B/C doesn't improve the old titles. And I find console software doesn't age terribly well.

At least for older PC titles, your new hardware should run those games at better settings/frame rates or there'd be some 'ultra resolution' mod to try.
 
if no one plays them that much, then why do they even have a service to stream old games (playstation now)?
Obviously the business model of rebuying old games is profitable. 0 costs in terms of development and just squeezing out fresh profits.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
if no one plays them that much, then why do they even have a service to stream old games (playstation now)?
Obviously the business model of rebuying old games is profitable. 0 costs in terms of development and just squeezing out fresh profits.
Click to expand...
Because it probably doesn't cost them much to do this. They had already acquired the company that backs their Now services and its use is far more than just Now. They use it for remote play, streaming, and share play. All 4 of those features run off the same technology and is much easier to swallow then that kind of cost for one feature.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
if no one plays them that much, then why do they even have a service to stream old games (playstation now)?
Obviously the business model of rebuying old games is profitable. 0 costs in terms of development and just squeezing out fresh profits.
Click to expand...

Rarely used doesn't mean never used. It's about cost versus profit. An emulator in the grand scheme of things is not that expensive to write. And with streaming, you're still paying to use it. With a hardware solution, you have development time, but you might not likely ever see any of the money from old games, as they're mostly second hand sales.
 
It's a good thing to have, but I don't use it that often. I do sometimes, but I have no problem plugging in 2 cables (HDMI/Power) to the 360 or PS3 and playing some games.

I've bought some games I otherwise wouldn't because of it, though. Specials on Xbox Live, and since I could play them on the One, I bought them and tried them out. Didn't get a lot of play time, but it got them a sale.
 
Right. I'd imagine that if backwards compatibility came with improved visuals and frame rates for old games, that could make the option more appealing, but it's 99% of the time the same, last gen experience.
 
A little company called Warthog authored a title: "Richard Burns Rally*" way back in the day, and ported it to both the original Xbox and to Windows. It's still very much in my thinking today and is really the one legacy sim I most want to get and keep running on my new PC (I still say it's the toughest driving sim I've ever raced).

It's also popular enough, 13 years after its release that attempts are being made even now to build a good VR port for it (I discovered that just two days ago). Unfortunately you can't do any of that with consoles, so maybe the Sony exec has a valid point.

[*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Burns_Rally]
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
Well sure, why do I want to pay again for a game I already own? Honestly I can only think of 2 or 3 games that I didn't finish and care about (kind of), but I'm not buying them again.

But yeah, I'm sure it's one of those things that sounds great but not used as much.
 
For me, I'll play "classic" games (ie. those from 2+ generations ago) but rarely anything from the Xbox and PS3 era. Those titles just don't age well since we have better looking/playing sequels to most of them. Either that or there are PC versions of those games that don't look so dated.
RDR and Gears 2 & 3 might be the only games from that era I'd consider replaying because they never got PC ports and they were great games.
 
Classic Sony Corporate Head-up-ass response. The truth is that emulating the dog's breakfast architecture of the PS3 is almost impossible so they have to shit on the idea instead of admitting it.

Backwards compatibility on Xbox has been a huge success but I guess gamers don't want that.
 
JakCrow said:
Right. I'd imagine that if backwards compatibility came with improved visuals and frame rates for old games, that could make the option more appealing, but it's 99% of the time the same, last gen experience.
Click to expand...

Agreed, that also would teeter on the side of upgrading and not 'backwards compatible'. That would take work on each game devs side of things and as stated, there really isn't money to be had there.

I myself whined about BC for my xbone when I got it, then after about 2 years I realized I hadn't even touched my 360 since then and it was still connected and working. I think BC might have more appeal if it was more than one system back, or maybe we just want it because it isn't there. Like I want to play ps1 games, not ps3 etc.
 
They could at least put software emulation on the PS4 for PS1 and PS2 games like they did on previous consoles at no additional cost in hardware. This is the last major gripe I have about the PS4 and it's annoying that they have some of their old games available in the PSN store for repurchase, but you can't play them on your console even if you already have the disk.
 
Semantics said:
rebuying games isn't backwards compability
Click to expand...

Burticus said:
Well sure, why do I want to pay again for a game I already own? Honestly I can only think of 2 or 3 games that I didn't finish and care about (kind of), but I'm not buying them again.

But yeah, I'm sure it's one of those things that sounds great but not used as much.
Click to expand...
On the Xbox ONE you can insert the disc from your Xbox 360 and it will recognize the game and allow you to download the game for no additional cost. I did this with the Mass Effect trilogy and Fallout 3. Of course, the caveat is you need the disc in the drive to play the game. You can also download any Xbox 360 game added to XBONE BC that you originally purchased on Xbox Live at no additional cost. I did this with the Assassin's Creed trilogy and a bunch of arcade games.

This is the way it should be done on the PS4, but I guess Sony isn't one to pass up a profit opportunity no matter how small.
 
face2palm said:
Classic Sony Corporate Head-up-ass response. The truth is that emulating the dog's breakfast architecture of the PS3 is almost impossible so they have to shit on the idea instead of admitting it.

Backwards compatibility on Xbox has been a huge success but I guess gamers don't want that.
Click to expand...

"huge success on Xbox" by what metric? Here's the reality, let's cut through the bullshit:

Microsoft had a great Xbox division that executed spectacularly during the 360 golden era. The library was fresh, superb.

Xbox One they got complacent, screwed up their launch and have allowed their library to atrophy, while Sony has churned out hit after hit, new IP after new IP.

With Microsoft having really nothing to talk about in the month to month marketing cycle, they've been crutching on adding a few 10 year old 360 games to the XB1 library every month, and patting themselves on the back for it.

A console lives and dies by new exclusive games. Backward compat nostalgia-games are a nice value add, but not a replacement for new IP or sole sustenance. Decade old lastgen games, and rehashes of stale IP (GoW, Halo, Forza, zzz) aren't getting enough couch gamers off asses to go out and buy XB1's.
 
Last edited:
Armenius said:
This is the way it should be done on the PS4, but I guess Sony isn't one to pass up a profit opportunity no matter how small.
Click to expand...
I think Sony just understands that old games don't sell new systems.
 
DPI said:
I think Sony just understands that old games don't sell new systems.
Click to expand...
I think more people would be apt to upgrading their console on release if it had backwards compatibility, especially at launch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T4rd
like this
It's definitely most important in the early days of new consoles, but reduces over time as the console's library fills out. I still want all my older games to play on newer machines. I have no issue reconnecting my old console but it is still an unnecessary step and a waste of space IMHO. It really should be built into new systems automatically especially starting with the current generation PS4/XB1, since I doubt they will radically change the architecture anymore.

I feel they are being a bit disingenuous about the demand because if there wasn't any demand for it then why the hell does Playstation Now exist? I think they are trying to make it sound like it's not so often used so they can just put a paywall in for you to play your older games under the guise that "not many people" play it, and have you buy the games again at some premium price with a subscription to keep playing it (ie PS Now).
 
agree with sony.

i play all my old ps games on the system they came with.

i even bought an old CRT tv just to get rid of the horrible input lag on my fat ps1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
Just chill till there's a good ps3 emulator for the pc and this will all blow over. . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
BC is cool when you think about it but when you actually start playing the games you end up saying to yourself, damn that was shit, shit game shit graphics shit gameplay etc and 99% will probably end up going back to much newer games.

Its good as a gimmick but not much else tbh, I had hundreds of ps2 games, played a few on the ps3 but that was it as I preferred the latest games.
 
I set up a "RetroPi" with a bunch of old NES, SNES and Sega games. I played with it for a couple hours, then I was pretty much done. It's nice to have, but there's a lot of other games I'd rather spend my time on.
 
Master_shake_ said:
agree with sony.

i play all my old ps games on the system they came with.

i even bought an old CRT tv just to get rid of the horrible input lag on my fat ps1.
Click to expand...

I just cleaned out my old storage locker and found my original cases and discs for a variety of my ps1 favs including the original usa launches of FF7, Xenogears, Lunar, Grandia, Wild Arms, and Legend of Dragoon. Something about those black discs still hold so much sentimental value It's hard to part with them even at collectors prices. I've gone to pc emulators on them for quite some time now in the off chance i run a playthrough, but I would love to plug in my old memory cards and see the months of my life I dumped into some of those grind heavy ps1 classics.
 
oldmanbal said:
I just cleaned out my old storage locker and found my original cases and discs for a variety of my ps1 favs including the original usa launches of FF7, Xenogears, Lunar, Grandia, Wild Arms, and Legend of Dragoon. Something about those black discs still hold so much sentimental value It's hard to part with them even at collectors prices. I've gone to pc emulators on them for quite some time now in the off chance i run a playthrough, but I would love to plug in my old memory cards and see the months of my life I dumped into some of those grind heavy ps1 classics.
Click to expand...

i still have my launch copy of FFVII and there is no amount of money that could get me to part with it.
 
Jim Kim said:
The argument is similar to Micosofts claims that no one used the start menu, and look where it got them.
Click to expand...
You use the start menu?

I can't remember the last time i've ever used it, i just windows-key -> start typing what i'm looking for -> enter
face2palm said:
Classic Sony Corporate Head-up-ass response. The truth is that emulating the dog's breakfast architecture of the PS3 is almost impossible so they have to shit on the idea instead of admitting it.

Backwards compatibility on Xbox has been a huge success but I guess gamers don't want that.
Click to expand...
If a community that doesn't have inside documentation can do ps3 emulation i'm sure sony could come up with something. A ps3 emulator does exist although it's pretty new. 360 also has a barely there emulator, wii has a really great emulator leaves little reason to use the wii or gamecube ever, wiiU has an okay emulator. sony def could make a pretty decent lle.
 
I play the hell out of Skate 3 on my Xbone. It's pretty much the only decent skateboarding game there is.
 
mgulbran said:
"While backward compatibility is a feature a lot of console owners seems to like having, it's not one that a lot of Xbox One owners seem to spend a lot of time using."
Click to expand...
"Those people all fled to PC a long time ago."
 
Personally, i went from ps2 to a 360 because sony removed the backward compatibility when they reduced the price of the ps3, since i wasn't going to pay the ridiculous price at launch.

Then on e3, ms said that if you wanted backwards compatibility with the xbone that you should just keep a 360 next to it.

Thats when i said screw this, built a gaming pc and never looked back.

First thing i did with it was to play my old dos games and install steam.

They can keep their consoles.
 
mgulbran said:
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017...games-are-less-than-2-of-xbox-one-usage-time/


"While backward compatibility is a feature a lot of console owners seems to like having, it's not one that a lot of Xbox One owners seem to spend a lot of time using."

"In the end, only about 1.5 percent of the more than 1.65 billion minutes of Xbox One usage time we tracked was spent on the 300+ backward-compatible Xbox 360 games, in aggregate. That translates to an average of just 23.9 minutes per sampled active Xbox One user spent on Xbox 360 games out of 1,526 average minutes of Xbox One usage during the sampling period."
Click to expand...
That's still about 412,500 hours...

Assuming 20 hours a week for one year = ~1k hours, that would come out to about 412,000 people out there using backward compatibility. I'm just guesstimating but I could see this being a popular thing.

I suppose this is why PC gaming still rules the day.
 
Microsoft / Sony don't want us to have BC anymore......they want us to subscribe to their respective game streaming services, so it's no surprise to see them start to set-up the Straw Men to knock down..."See? nobody cares about BC!"......and yet I play every AAA title and generally ignore all the indie games, but I guess because I am not completely replaying the new games immediately, Microsoft calls that a "Loss". So, this month I got Assassins Creed III free. But because I didn't immediately start playing it, right now, Microsoft calls that "low interest". Except I am guessing that most folks add it to the library and play it on a rainy day......

I played Force Unleashed II as soon as it was available, also one or two other games in the past. But I've realized my gaming habits are associated with my age-group, and guys in their 20s may simply not care about B/C in the same way that, when I was young, I gave 0 F's about B/C...I was all about the future and my consoles wouldn't degrade and die in the closet (he said, naively).
 
Oh good, that means they'll take down their Playstation Now service which hosts a lot of games you can't play on your PS4. I guess I can always play PS3 games on my PC with an emulator, like a dirty peasant.

playstation-plus-annual-fee-jumping-10-in-september-no-new-3359160.png
 
I used to game hard on PS1 games when I had my PS2, the added bonus of having slightly better graphics (but at the same framerate...) was cheese on the burger. I'm sure people would still game on last gen games on new gen consoles if: They haven't played that highly rated game. Or increased graphics fidelity (look at HD re-released games at a premium price). Or strangely possible, if older games cost the same as new gen games (I payed 70 bucks on this game, I'll game hard on it!).

Why not have backwards compatibility on a console if it does not take a lot of resource or effort in configuring the unit? It adds value to the console and gives a chance for gamers to play a larger library.

Buy old gen consoles for old gen games? ... I guess there is a lot of reasons to have backwards compatibility, and a lot for not having it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T4rd
like this
I'm the type to go back and play old games. Sure, I don't do it much, but I like having that ability. It also allows me to sell off my PS3. I'd love it to work with PS2 games and Sony released a controller adapter that didn't have any input lag. Want to get my Beatmania on, without having to pull out my Japanese PS2.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
if no one plays them that much, then why do they even have a service to stream old games (playstation now)?
Obviously the business model of rebuying old games is profitable. 0 costs in terms of development and just squeezing out fresh profits.
Click to expand...
Because it's easier to update the software in the game and having them play in an environment that lends compatibility across all titles that's been updated versus patching each game that's stored on a disc.

Remember DX compatibility issues early on? The developer had to patch each title to work on multitudes of games but it got easier when MS took charge and offered the capability to chose which mode you got to play in. That's not easy to do on a console.

Not to mention with some of these systems they have to worry about hardware compatibility as well. You can't easily patch a game on a disc to work from the PS2 emotion engine on the new x86.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top