How do we know that the PS3 as it is now is not the culminative work of a design team designing a PS3 with backwards compatibility in mind? I mean, I get Alpha Spartan's point, but what if they'd had it in mind all along and the PS3 at the moment is actually a tradeoff of what they can do thermally with B/C as an integral part of the machine?
Backwards compatibility on Xbox 360
- Thread starter pipo
- Start date
Damn, mention Sony and sacrifice and everyone people come out the woodworks, but completely overlooking the meat of the post...b/c is useless and not just for Sony.
I still hold that backwards compatibility is and has always been a bullet point for marketing, yeah its great in the first couple of months when the new system has limited software, but overall, I would venture to say it is probably the most underutilized aspect of a console, regardless of whether it has the Sony name on it. I think its crazy not to assume EVERY mfr. has to make some tradeoff when it comes to b/c, for me as a games that tradeoff is working on new and improved features, not worrying about a 5+ year old games. Heisenberg teaches us that.
I just have never understood the concept of me buying a new console to play last generations stuff if you already own the last gen console, even more so now with all of the downloadable content. In my case it is a slight factor in me buying the PS3 because I don't own the PS2 and have only played 3 games on the system and I hear about all of these great games that never made it to DC or Xbox or 360.
Seriously, if Sony mentioned that they were removing B/C from the PS3 would that stop any of us from buying it. MSFT could have probably implemented a quarter more of their intended features already if they didn't have to worry about B/C. This is N first attempt at it if I am not mistaken, so it will be interesting to see what/how they do in that dept.
I still hold that backwards compatibility is and has always been a bullet point for marketing, yeah its great in the first couple of months when the new system has limited software, but overall, I would venture to say it is probably the most underutilized aspect of a console, regardless of whether it has the Sony name on it. I think its crazy not to assume EVERY mfr. has to make some tradeoff when it comes to b/c, for me as a games that tradeoff is working on new and improved features, not worrying about a 5+ year old games. Heisenberg teaches us that.
I just have never understood the concept of me buying a new console to play last generations stuff if you already own the last gen console, even more so now with all of the downloadable content. In my case it is a slight factor in me buying the PS3 because I don't own the PS2 and have only played 3 games on the system and I hear about all of these great games that never made it to DC or Xbox or 360.
Seriously, if Sony mentioned that they were removing B/C from the PS3 would that stop any of us from buying it. MSFT could have probably implemented a quarter more of their intended features already if they didn't have to worry about B/C. This is N first attempt at it if I am not mistaken, so it will be interesting to see what/how they do in that dept.
Some games just don't get old; I played through FFVII for the first time a long time after I got my PS2, and I played through MGS pretty regularly. With PS2, I think, the case will be even stronger because there are so many AAA games on the platform. And if Sony can deliver on their promise of upscaling PS2 games or adding AA then I'm gonna want to play through so many games with the improved image quality.NucNavST3 said:
So no, I do not think it is a non-issue. And for what it's worth, I remember at the announcement that Sony might not allow PS2 peripherals or Memory Cards to be used with PS3 caused a lot of people to say they were having second thoughts about buying it. B/C means that the money you spent on games for the last five years is not rendered null by the new console.
predicate said:
Its a non-issue, because there is no law that requires you to relinquish the console you currently own, your only sacrifice would be no upscaling, and more space for the new one. Someone not buying the console because it wouldn't support their memory card is full of talk, its easy to say that when the thing is a year away, when it launches attitudes change rapidly.
I worked at Best Buy during the release of the PS2, and I can honestly tell you that there were just as many PS1 games being sold alongside the PS2 as there were PS2 games. I for one sold my PS1 when the PS2 came out and used the money to help pay for a PS2, that's one reason to not keep the console around. On top of that, as mentioned, many people don't want to have 4 or 5 consoles sitting around.
Just because one person thinks b/c is a waste, that doesn't mean everyone else feels that way. I know that I just recently finally finished FFVIII on my PS2, and I've played through FFIX and Chrono Cross recently on my PS2. Just because new games may look prettier, it doesn't make them better than the older games. Better graphics does NOT equal better game.
Just because one person thinks b/c is a waste, that doesn't mean everyone else feels that way. I know that I just recently finally finished FFVIII on my PS2, and I've played through FFIX and Chrono Cross recently on my PS2. Just because new games may look prettier, it doesn't make them better than the older games. Better graphics does NOT equal better game.
I think it's even more relevant when you have a system that is well supported beyond the release of its successor. It encourages publishers to keep supporting the older systems too. I know where I'll be playing GoW2 and GTOnline as well as a number of others - and it's looking like it won't be on my PS2.
heliosphere
Newcomer
I'm interested to see what Sony does for b/c. The only way I can see them delivering really solid b/c is to throw a PS2 on a chip into the PS3 solely for the purpose of playing PS1/PS2 games. It's probably too late now to make that PS2 on a chip available as an extra resource for developers working on PS3 titles but that's not really a big deal. The only downside of this approach is cost - I would guess it would have to add at least $25 to the manufacturing cost at launch, though that would no doubt come down over time. Sony are in a much better position than MS were to go this route as they own all the IP and they've already got a one-chip PS2 solution.
The alternative of b/c that relies to some extent on software emulation is going to be a huge problem for Sony to implement effectively. PS2 games are much more likely than Xbox games to rely on specific features of the PS2's notoriously convoluted architecture. There are likely to be lots of very hardware specific tricks in many PS2 games and sensitivity to timing issues for DMA transfers etc. I would be very surprised if Sony can deliver b/c for PS2 even to the level that MS has managed with the 360 without a lot of hardware support.
The alternative of b/c that relies to some extent on software emulation is going to be a huge problem for Sony to implement effectively. PS2 games are much more likely than Xbox games to rely on specific features of the PS2's notoriously convoluted architecture. There are likely to be lots of very hardware specific tricks in many PS2 games and sensitivity to timing issues for DMA transfers etc. I would be very surprised if Sony can deliver b/c for PS2 even to the level that MS has managed with the 360 without a lot of hardware support.
NucNavST3 said:
It is relevant if like many others, I have limited TV console space... not to mention I also have Xbox and GameCube.
I hesitate to write off B/C because (i) I do play old [played and unplayed] games during the console's lifecycle; (ii) I feel that perhaps B/C wasn't fully played out in past consoles, so we may not see its full potential yet. Ironically, the online platform is supposed to revive back catalog (just like Amazon revived old book sales). So it makes sense to revisit B/C under new light.
e.g., if I were to play FFVIII on a PS3 and still get hooked to the other FFVIII fans on the PS3 online platform, it will mean something to me.
For that matter, I may try FFVII to see what all the fuss is about since it's only a few clicks away (and priced low enough). FF XIII is not going to give me the same experiences as FFVII. New games are not necessarily better than old ones.
Back on topic, Xbox 360 has other reasons for doing selected software B/C. If they don't think it's important (for real !), why bother at all ?
Lets come back to this thread in a year or a year and a half, I would like to see how many PS1 and PS2 titles everyone plays. Im not quite sure what equation we would need to derive to determine whether b/c is worth it. So what if you want to play GoW2 or FFVII or two or three other games, how does the work necessitated to bring that about, make it worth it to the companies, so a tiny percentage of people can play a couple of games. I love(d) my dreamcast but its sitting in a closet only used for development.
I love MAME and I still love my old arcade games (see the nostalgia thread), but I would sacrifice what I believe to be a VERY small fraction of the gaming population (just because people were buying PS1 games when the PS2 was out doesn't mean that they were buying those games to play ON the PS2), with putting my (in the role of mfr.) full force behind my latest and greatest, especially knowing there are going to be bumps in the road.
I always thought that one of the ways you create nostalgia is by NOT playing the games.
I'm interested in what the PS3 can do for me for next gen gaming, not past gen.
We shall agree to disagree. endl;
Now in MSFTs case with them not owning any IP, it was an even worse decision, I say kill the project, although I'm pretty sure the BC team could probably switch over to the xbox handheld team with ease, if they are not already apart of it. Assuming there is a handheld team...
I love MAME and I still love my old arcade games (see the nostalgia thread), but I would sacrifice what I believe to be a VERY small fraction of the gaming population (just because people were buying PS1 games when the PS2 was out doesn't mean that they were buying those games to play ON the PS2), with putting my (in the role of mfr.) full force behind my latest and greatest, especially knowing there are going to be bumps in the road.
I always thought that one of the ways you create nostalgia is by NOT playing the games.
I'm interested in what the PS3 can do for me for next gen gaming, not past gen.
We shall agree to disagree. endl;
Now in MSFTs case with them not owning any IP, it was an even worse decision, I say kill the project, although I'm pretty sure the BC team could probably switch over to the xbox handheld team with ease, if they are not already apart of it. Assuming there is a handheld team...
BC allows people who want to play old games without getting the older console do so.
I don't have a PS1. I played FFIX and FFVII on PS2.
Recursively call the above for all worthy titles and add 1 to count each time.
But I can understand if some people don't see value/enjoyment in that. But I do know a lot of people do. I also think it gives the platform that can provide this kind of thing a much bigger "presence"
I don't have a PS1. I played FFIX and FFVII on PS2.
Recursively call the above for all worthy titles and add 1 to count each time.
But I can understand if some people don't see value/enjoyment in that. But I do know a lot of people do. I also think it gives the platform that can provide this kind of thing a much bigger "presence"
scooby_dooby
Legend
rounin said:
That's the problem, what's "a lot"? We need some #'s to put this in context, all we have here is some very hardcore gamers who like to play 10 year old PSX games, I can't believe that represents much more than a tiny fraction of gamers.
It would've been nice if MS had not gone for BC, just so we could see how much of an impact it actually had on consumer satisfaction and sales overall.
I just don't see it being important when all is said and done. IMO, I think it looks good on paper, but in practice BC moves very very few units.
Mordecaii said:
Thats just it, which group has the greater numbers, those that use b/c or those that don't, those are the numbers I would like to see. At the end of the day I still ask the question, if the PS3 didn't have b/c would you not buy it? I just don't think it sways purchasers enough for it to be an issue.
Again I say all of this knowing that in my case b/c is actually a good thing, because I have no clue what their lineup is and it could actually move me into some "new" games. But again, not having that library available, I would still buy it. Same goes for the Rev, I don't want it for the past greats, I want it for the up and coming greats.
Also, I don't think I EVER said that better graphics == better game, I'm pretty sure in the nostalgia thread I replied to someone saying that ZORK (f**cking ZORK) was one of my favorite all time games and Galage is my greatest game ever. Not to mention I own every Live Arcade game...you need to bring the "NOT equal better game" to someone else. I've stated many times on this board that I play Arcade an order of magnitude more than my retail games of which I have plenty for the 360.
edit: Most humble apologies if my tone is bitter, but I have been gaming since '79, so believe me I know about gameplay vs. graphics.
Last edited by a moderator:
NucNavST3 said:Is it even fair to say you have limited space when you own all three?
Of course. They are cramped into a small space. All the controllers are unplugged and stashed behind the consoles so that I can still see the face plates.
Doesn't that count as "limited space" ?One more point I'd like to add is with more casual gamers joining us, and improving graphics last gen (PS2,Xbox,GC), it's not inconceivable that more people will find their way to "old" games.
The number of hours a non-hardcore JRPG/RPG fan has in the last-gen for Playstation platforms already compensates in terms of the "non-hardcore" argument. We don't have to use hyperboles like "10 years" or anything, since a lot of the good RPGs on that system came out within these last 10 years.
Even if we are to talk about PSX, there are just too many good games (and hence many, many hours of satisfaction) and now with the PS3, JRPG/RPG fans will get to enjoy all the games they wish they could have played even if they had to sell the older systmes for various reasons. When we count in PS2 RPGs, the number of customer satisfaction hours (or if you like, the factor of delivered customer satisfaction) can be considered to be quite large (possibly an understatement there ) One can probably already guess how many people belong in this category (maybe hard to grasp for Xbox zealots?)
Personally, I think there are some things in business that can't be simply described by numbers and this is one of them. This is why I used the word "presence" which is vague.
Even if we are to talk about PSX, there are just too many good games (and hence many, many hours of satisfaction) and now with the PS3, JRPG/RPG fans will get to enjoy all the games they wish they could have played even if they had to sell the older systmes for various reasons. When we count in PS2 RPGs, the number of customer satisfaction hours (or if you like, the factor of delivered customer satisfaction) can be considered to be quite large (possibly an understatement there
) One can probably already guess how many people belong in this category (maybe hard to grasp for Xbox zealots?) Personally, I think there are some things in business that can't be simply described by numbers and this is one of them. This is why I used the word "presence" which is vague.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 2197
- Games Industry