*spin-off* Importance of Backward Compatibility Discussion

[-tkf-]

Yes, but if the impact isn't large, it's not an issue. And if those early adopters aren't buying software because their playing last-gen games, that's no good to the publishers either. What use is 10 million launch day consoles if no-one's buying next-gen games? A platform that doesn't run old games is guaranteed to be selling new games to whoever buys it. Of no BC means no-one buys it, the platform is dead. But otherwise, it's a normal starting position. The platform is always made or broken on the quality of its software library. If there's nothing compelling, people wouldn't ever upgrade. If the launch software isn't any good, just delay 6 months until it is, rather than spend great wads of cash on implementing the limited feature of BC.

That's the ideal, but that model didn't really exist before iPad apps; at least not regards consoles. So neither Live! nor PSN should be expected to carry over. Live! might. Next-gen downloads should definitely be part of a continuous platform though.

Chicken/Egg. You have Console, when you launch your aim is to get as many as possible in the hand of buyers. You take a loss on the price, you create a long list of features to convince buyers this is it. One of those features is of course games, the more games the better. I don´t know the impact, i just know from what i heard back when i was selling consoles that in the start of the consoles life BC is discussed more often that later (which makes sense of course).

And in this case, with so many games sold on PSN/XBL it's more important than ever. The more i think about it the more i will find it wrong to log on to my PS4 and find nothing i can download of all that i have purchased. And my spending is most likely more limited than others

 

[Arwin]

I'm with Shifty on this one. I buy next-gen because I want to play next gen games and am tired of current gen stuff. So it's just a matter of getting enough titles out there. That's not to say that BC has no value, that would be nonsense, and I feel there's a definite advantage in binding people to your platform cross generation by providing access to previous purchases on your current system, or cross system like Sony is now doing with some Vita/PS3 titles.

But the sacrifice has to be worth it. If not, then yes right now personally I am in a much better position this gen having an HDMI receiver that I can easily plug two more devices into. I still have working PS2 and Xbox lying around doing nothing, and I basically only ever used the PS2 to set up some lightgun games in the shed, something I couldn't do on an LCD TV anyway.

On the other hand, I also realise this is different for others and not a general apply to all rule. On Vita I imagine PSP RPGs (and MH) are still quite popular and it generally takes a while for enough new ones to show up. And with a portable device it is less of an option to bring both all the time.

Just realise not everyone steps in at launch, and those that do are generally really into it for the new stuff, especially as the generational gap is so big. Therefore I think it is relatively unimportant.

 

[RobertR1]

That's the ideal, but that model didn't really exist before iPad apps; at least not regards consoles. So neither Live! nor PSN should be expected to carry over. Live! might. Next-gen downloads should definitely be part of a continuous platform though.

Then bless apple for starting the trend. Either MS can adapt accordingly or I'll be much more conservative with my purchases going forward.

Also, devs should be proactive to update current games to take advantage of newer hardware. The ones who figure this next generation will benefit the most. The ones who do not will be left behind and likely shutting down their doors.

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't mind paying more for updated games but I don't want to have to re-buy then.

 

[Barbarian]

Also, devs should be proactive to update current games to take advantage of newer hardware.

Old iPhone apps didn't magically take advantage of iPad and its HD screen, did they?
No, developers made new "HD" versions and charged you again for it.

There's also a hidden cost for this "forward compatibility". It's been discussed many times on this forum. You need a fat, high-level API to be able to do this, which makes all apps/games very inefficient.
This is exactly what Apple does, and it kind of works for 2D and simple 3D games.
Imagine if Sony forced everyone to use OpenGL on PS3 and effectively gimped all PS3 games so that maybe many years in the future gamers can play these games on PS4.
It doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Arwin]

Note that in accordance to iOS being pc like, developers have had to update their apps sometimes just to remain compatible. Also, newer versions of the OS leave off devices somewhere around 3 years and older, as this iPod Touch I'm typing now will never upgrade beyond the 4.3 it has, and various apps suffer for it. I can't even log into youtube anymore (though I can at least still search and play) and various apps crash. But it's still very useful to be able to buy once and get to install on various devices, through time.

Note that cross platform support for online purposes are actually supported on Vita. Various games I had purchased digitally for PSP (clear advantage for me, having two PSPs) have carried to the Vita and play better there (faster, better screen, better controls). I only had to redownload them, iOS style.

 

[Brad Grenz]

It'd be a PCIe type connector, look at a Dell laptop docking port as an example. They can start with all units having one and if they don't sell many expansion units then they can drop it on a lower priced base unit.

Yeah, given a good enough custom connector it could piggy back on the PS4's optical drive, hard drive, network connection, controller interface, output and even its GPU and VRAM. All you'd be left with is a shrunk down Cell and 256MBs of XDR on a PCB. That could sell for a profit at $99 and not be very big.

 

[eastmen]

I would imagine that things like XBLA titles would be BC along with xbox originals. I don't think the main xbox 360 games will be BC . I bet MS will give them a treatment like sony has been doing by upresing and adding better textures and re releasing them

 

[AlphaWolf]

If you're going to launch a loss leader, the last thing you want is people playing their old games on it. You need them buying new product. So while BC might make the box attractive to some people that doesn't make it a good investment for them.

 

[Elan Tedronai]

Why?

But if adding BC takes away from the PS4 experience, that'll disappoint Sony fans. Further discussion here.

because the more games are released for the ps3/psn, the harder it becomes to dump them all and cut your fanbase from your new product.

and how the hell is adding BC taking away from the ps4 experience. You havent even played it yet!!

Sony already payed a huge price by cutting BC from ps3 which resulted in slow migration of ps2 users to ps3.

Back then they were coming off a position of strength and still paid a heavy price for. Now it would blow back in their face if they tried it again.

 

[Elan Tedronai]

I am positively sure that people who dont value BC are folks who either dont have the console in the first place or if they do have meagre amount of ps3 and psn games.

Only logical explanation. How on earth in this digital age when companies like sony are trying to build their own network store after years of failure are somehow going to turn around to us sony fans and tell us that Wipeout HD will not work on the ps4. I mean what the hell? This means that if my ps3 breaks in the future i would have to shell out a new console just to access my paid digital content.

Kinda like me buying old pentium pc to access my old itune songs. The backlash would be enormous and the fanbase would be cut apart. After 7 years of building a tattered fanbase sony would be effectively wiping it out completely in one go.

Marketing and company suicide. Sony will effectively destroy their own hopes for their store.

Sony. Dont do it. I have paid £350 for my 60 GB ps3 at launch back when the pound was killing the dollar. I paid it coz i wanted BC badly. I have bought all your launch consoles. Yeah don't do it

 

[AlphaWolf]

Are they going to stop building the ps3 when they launch the new console? They dropped bc from the ps3 after 18months. And I don't own a ps3 at all, but I do own a 360, and about 40 games (~30 full and about 10 xbl) for it, but there's only about 5 of them that I play anymore and they all came out in the last year or so and I'll be done with them when I buy a new console (or near enough) And I prefer they not include BC, because I don't want to pay for a feature I won't use, I want the best new console they can make not something half done because they felt the need to anchor it with legacy crap.

 

[Jedi2016]

Only logical explanation. How on earth in this digital age when companies like sony are trying to build their own network store after years of failure are somehow going to turn around to us sony fans and tell us that Wipeout HD will not work on the ps4. I mean what the hell? This means that if my ps3 breaks in the future i would have to shell out a new console just to access my paid digital content.

Most excellent point. The way I see it, they have three options:

1) No BC, customers will just have to keep their old systems around.
2) No BC, developers will be forced to update the games to PS4 code or have the game removed from the store.
3) Make the system BC. Which would also make it BC for all disc-based games, since they're all written for the same hardware (unless the new system has no disc drive at all and will rely 100% on digital content, which is highly unlikely).

That goes for Microsoft, too.

Sadly, I have a feeling they may actually go for option #1. After all, there's PSP/Vita games up for download in the PSN, that aren't playable on the PS3. Why they can't just have the store detect your hardware and limit games to that platform (by default) is beyond me.

 

[rekator]

Are they going to stop building the ps3 when they launch the new console? They dropped bc from the ps3 after 18months. And I don't own a ps3 at all, but I do own a 360, and about 40 games (~30 full and about 10 xbl) for it, but there's only about 5 of them that I play anymore and they all came out in the last year or so and I'll be done with them when I buy a new console (or near enough) And I prefer they not include BC, because I don't want to pay for a feature I won't use, I want the best new console they can make not something half done because they felt the need to anchor it with legacy crap.

No BC at launch, simple no buy… Why the Hell I'm spend 400+€ in a system with only 2/3 interested games the first two years. I'm waiting two years and price cut to jump.
BC at launch, I'm jump in at start, and take advantage of the two gens games.
And we're many doing like this, BC for big games (specially this the MP) is a need the first two years, if you want a quick adoption.

 

[AlphaWolf]

So wait 2 years, you're doing them a favor by not buying it at launch if its a loss leader.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

and how the hell is adding BC taking away from the ps4 experience. You havent even played it yet!!

Read the whole thread. In short, you either have to have a system based on the old architecture that isn't as good as the new architecture, or you add the old hardware in the same box that pushes up the price.

Sony already payed a huge price by cutting BC from ps3 which resulted in slow migration of ps2 users to ps3.

What?! PS3 had BC at launch. It was slow in adoption because it cost so flippin' much!

How on earth in this digital age when companies like sony are trying to build their own network store after years of failure are somehow going to turn around to us sony fans and tell us that Wipeout HD will not work on the ps4.

Because you bought a PS3 game for a PS3. You don't expect it to work on your PSVita, or expect an XBox game to work in your Wii. PSN was never pitched or advised a hardware-independent experience, so your expecting it to be is just you being ignorant/naive/confused.

Sony. Dont do it. I have paid £350 for my 60 GB ps3 at launch back when the pound was killing the dollar. I paid it coz i wanted BC badly. I have bought all your launch consoles. Yeah don't do it

Emotional pleas aside, they have to do what makes business sense. The best sense here IMO is create the standard SKU as sans BC and add BC via a peripheral. That way everyone is catered for. Those who want BC will pay for it; those who don't care aren't lumbered with it. How is that not preferable to expensive full-BC for everyone?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

2) No BC, developers will be forced to update the games to PS4 code or have the game removed from the store.

Or leave it in the store in the PS3 section... Has anyone here bought a PSP or PSVita game accidentally and been angry that it doesn't work on their PS3? Anyone?

3) Make the system BC. Which would also make it BC for all disc-based games, since they're all written for the same hardware (unless the new system has no disc drive at all and will rely 100% on digital content, which is highly unlikely).

4) Make it optionally BC. That wouldn't add to the cost for users who don't want BC, and would enable those who value BC to run a BC system.

Sadly, I have a feeling they may actually go for option #1. After all, there's PSP/Vita games up for download in the PSN, that aren't playable on the PS3. Why they can't just have the store detect your hardware and limit games to that platform (by default) is beyond me.

That's a good idea. I guess they don't have browser polling in their store. But then again, if you can buy stuff on one device for another, like buy a PSN game from PC, then they'd be better off with a hardware registration system like the Android store, which tells you if an app is compatible with your registered devices. As to why Sony don't do that - they're just stupid, hence a lot of their dos and don'ts

And we're many doing like this, BC for big games (specially this the MP) is a need the first two years, if you want a quick adoption.

Any numbers on that? The thread could be nicely ended with a simple proper reference to 'how many'. Only such numbers would only compare BC importance to past consoles and their launch libraries. What if the PS4 launched with an unprecedented first-year line-up? If that would do a better job of driving adoption (like Gears for XB360), then it makes more sense to save on investing in BC and spend that money on securing quality launch-year titles, no?

 

[Arwin]

The store already filters on what makes sense for you to be able to buy, basically. The Vita store only shows Vita and PSP stuff. The PS3 store shows stuff for PS3, Vita and PSP, because you can use the PS3 as an interface and transfer your games to your PSP/Vita from it, so that makes sense.

In fact, not even all PSP games that work are available on the Vita store, so apparently there's some work (licencing, testing or whatever) going on behind the scenes to determine what is shown for purchase directly. Some PSP not visible in the Vita store can still be bought from the PS3 store, then transferred to Vita and do work (list of that on Gaf), and some games are visible in your downloaded list and flagged as supported on Vita even when they aren't currently purchaseable on the Vita store (again, one reason here would/could be licencing agreements, etc.).

Anyway, that's just to say that having PS3 games in the PS4 store would not make sense, unless those games are actually playable on PS4, just like PS3 games in the Vita store currently don't make sense, or Vita games in the PSP store. You won't access the PS4 to buy games for your PS3 and then transfer them over, that doesn't make sense. You'll only be interested in PS3 games on your PS4 if they can actually be played on the PS4.

 

[Elan Tedronai]

Read the whole thread. In short, you either have to have a system based on the old architecture that isn't as good as the new architecture, or you add the old hardware in the same box that pushes up the price.

According to whom? You? The ignorant kotaku rumour peddling fakesters?

I will only take the word of sony's engineers and their internal developers.

What?! PS3 had BC at launch. It was slow in adoption because it cost so flippin' much!

It was slow in adaption because of price due to new expensive parts (Blu ray diodes, cell, RSX and ofcourse XDR RAM)l, loss of third party hit series from last gen, wii revolution and xbox cheap price. Had nothing to do with BC. Infact when i heard BC was being terminated i bought one the very next week. It was the only thing they could take out of the console to lower the price. They certainly could not take ps3 vital parts

Because you bought a PS3 game for a PS3. You don't expect it to work on your PSVita, or expect an XBox game to work in your Wii. PSN was never pitched or advised a hardware-independent experience, so your expecting it to be is just you being ignorant/naive/confused.

Sigh. Talk about oversimplification. Console games are one end of the spectrum. Portable on the other. In case you never heard psp games work on the vita. similarly one expects console games paid for digitally to work on the following console.

Emotional pleas aside, they have to do what makes business sense. The best sense here IMO is create the standard SKU as sans BC and add BC via a peripheral. That way everyone is catered for. Those who want BC will pay for it; those who don't care aren't lumbered with it. How is that not preferable to expensive full-BC for everyone?


business sense means they have to keep their fanbase and split it apart. Adding BC via pheriphreal is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard. How are you going to clump cell/rsx together in a peripheral? Not withstanding how ridiculous such dongle would look like?

Nah the common sense would be to beef up their current processor, add more RAM and a better GPU. They get to keep their BC at no added cost.

Comments in red

 

[fearsomepirate]

Comments in red

The DS, PS2, and PS3 all had dedicated hardware for backward compatibility. Xbox 360 had a software layer for BC, but it only worked for a few games. So the reason we're saying you need hardware for BC is observation, not rumors.

Emotional pleas aside, they have to do what makes business sense. The best sense here IMO is create the standard SKU as sans BC and add BC via a peripheral.

How the heck is that supposed to work? Are you envisioning software embedded on a USB flash drive or something? That would be pointless; if they actually take the time to write a PS3 emulator for the PS4 and not ship with it preinstalled, they'd sell it through PSN. The alternative, having a "peripheral" that's essentially a PS3 minus the HDD and I/O ports (and streaming all that data over a USB cable isn't going to work), isn't likely to be a successful product.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How the heck is that supposed to work?

That was my suggestion, and would be achieved by a dedicated ahrdware peripheral as mentioned earlier. The suggestion of a PCIe interface was a good one that I hadn't considered. It's definitely doable.