Current Events > Sony comments on Backwards Compatibility: Why would anyone play this?

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://time.com/4804768/playstation-4-ps4-pro-psvr-sales/

Another concern occasionally raised by PlayStation devotees involves the company's once-ubiquitous PlayStation 2. While Sony has in recent years devoted resources to bringing a handful of popular older titles to the PlayStation 4, the better part of that library is lost to time. For now, it seems that's where it'll remain. "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," says Ryan. "That, and I was at a Gran Turismo event recently where they had PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 games, and the PS1 and the PS2 games, they looked ancient, like why would anybody play this?"

#4thePlayers
---

sounds fair to me. most games from that gen were shit
---

MakoReizei posted...

sounds fair to me. most games from that gen were shit

Why are your opinions always so horrible

Sony knows what fans want! Knack 2 baby!!
---

Remember when Sony decided that EA Access wasn't good value for players as well? Good times.
---

Honestly I couldn't care less. I still have a PS3 and PS2.

If they support their arguments with statistics saying most people didn't use BC, I don't see the issue. I understand that a small percentage used it a ton on PS3, and that sucks for them. But I'll take a cheaper PS4 over BC any day.
---

Axiom posted...

MakoReizei posted...

sounds fair to me. most games from that gen were shit

Why are your opinions always so horrible

yeah I'm dying to play Rugrats Royal Ransom on my PS4
---

Mernardi posted...

Honestly I couldn't care less. I still have a PS3 and PS2.

If they support their arguments with statistics saying most people didn't use BC, I don't see the issue. I understand that a small percentage used it a ton on PS3, and that sucks for them. But I'll take a cheaper PS4 over BC any day.

Seems pretty successful on Xbox One. But to be fair they don't expect gamers to rebuy the game again so Sony aren't interested.
---

what a fucking joke!

"We don't have backwards compatibility because nobody wants to play old games on a new system. By the way, did you hear about our service, PSNow, where you can play old games on a new system?"

Hahahah what an F.U. to their user base. It still freaks me out that people actually defend these companies.

Darmik posted...

Mernardi posted...

Honestly I couldn't care less. I still have a PS3 and PS2.

If they support their arguments with statistics saying most people didn't use BC, I don't see the issue. I understand that a small percentage used it a ton on PS3, and that sucks for them. But I'll take a cheaper PS4 over BC any day.

Seems pretty successful on Xbox One. But to be fair they don't expect gamers to rebuy the game again so Sony aren't interested.

Yeah, it's successful when you have no new games to play lol.
---

Pretty sure Microsoft with their Xbox One bc has proved that backwards compatibility is a very popular feature. The issue is that Sony can't make it work efficiently and would rather charge for a crappy streaming service.
---

ChrisHanson24 posted...

what a fucking joke!

"We don't have backwards compatibility because nobody wants to play old games on a new system. By the way, did you hear about our service, PSNow, where you can play old games on a new system?"

Hahahah what an F.U. to their user base. It still freaks me out that people actually defend these companies.

Their big exclusive this month is literally a remade PS1 trilogy. They made a big deal about keeping the gameplay the exact same.

I'll never understand gamers who seem to be happy about having less games to play.
---

Microsoft in 2013: "If you're backwards compatible, you're really backwards"
Microsoft in 2017: "Now you can play over 350 Xbox 360 games on Xbox One"

Sony in 2014: *sells backwards compatibility on a subscription model, charges for PS2 remakes you already own digitally*
Sony in 2017: "Like why would anybody play this?"

That's pretty shitty for Playstation fans. I play 360 games all the time on my xbox one.

Imagine thinking less options is a good thing. The only time I've ever seen that statement proven wrong is Kitchen Nightmares where Ramsey will find a restaurant that has a 200 menu choice
---

I've been a fan of BC as a system feature ever since the PS2. I used it a bunch then and I use it a bunch now on my X1.
---

I don't think anyone uses PSNow tbh.

I guess I just don't understand people who get rid of their old systems.
---

Mernardi posted...

I don't think anyone uses PSNow tbh.

I guess I just don't understand people who get rid of their old systems.

Because PS Now is overpriced shit that is no where near as good as native emulation. It has nothing to do with not wanting to play older games.
---

MakoReizei posted...

sounds fair to me. most games from that gen were shit

They were good back then, but today they are unplayable with how shitty they look
---

Mernardi posted...

I don't think anyone uses PSNow tbh.

I guess I just don't understand people who get rid of their old systems.

I think it's got more to do with having a back-up console in case something happens to the older ones that can't be replaced as easily

They're probably still asshurt about the PS3 selling like shit at 599 and using that to justify no B/C

It would be cool if it was there, but I would be one of those people that would rarely even use it. I barely replay games as it is. Replaying past gen games? Nice talking to you.
---

Darmik posted...

Mernardi posted...

I don't think anyone uses PSNow tbh.

I guess I just don't understand people who get rid of their old systems.

Because PS Now is overpriced shit that is no where near as good as native emulation. It has nothing to do with not wanting to play older games.

Well, PS3's are cheap enough to justify buying again if you need to.

Microsoft only rolled out BC because they have no games and they needed something to give to Xbone owners.
---

eston posted...

I've been a fan of BC as a system feature ever since the PS2. I used it a bunch then and I use it a bunch now on my X1.

Did you ever use the BC on a PS3? I had a 60gb fatty, and it wasn't worth the hassle IMO. Games I wanted to play had some irritating features. Shadow hearts one? Can't see the spinner or strike zones when doing the lottery. Shadow hearts two? Game locks up if you hit the analog stick. Just went back to my PS2 instead.
---

Mernardi posted...

Well, PS3's are cheap enough to justify buying again if you need to.

Microsoft only rolled out BC because they have no games and they needed something to give to Xbone owners.

I own a PS3. This comment from Sony is laughably bad. It's so much more convenient having everything on your one modern console.

Microsoft is doing it because it's a consumer friendly move. They have plenty of third party and indie support. They didn't 'need' to. They chose to. Sony didn't. Just like how Microsoft let EA have a subscription platform and Sony didn't. Microsoft wants to set up an ecosystem where your library follows you wherever you go. Similar to what Steam does. Sony doesn't.

The only reason Sony isn't bothering is because they'd rather sell you PS Now subscriptions and remasters. It's just greed.

Besides I think most people at least expected to have your PS1/PS2 classics attached to your account to carry over. Sony didn't even bother with that.
---

Bump
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39pK2MV_sfs
---

I just want the ability to change my PSN name.
---

Dunno why people think BC can't be successful. An old Call of Duty game made it back into the top sales once it was made BC on the Xbox One.
---

YellowSUV posted...

Dunno why people think BC can't be successful. An old Call of Duty game made it back into the top sales once it was made BC on the Xbox One.

Some muppets say it's because there's nothing else to play on Xbox One which is stupid as hell.
---