So what's the argument against backwards compatibility?

Does Sony or MS have any argument why their systems aren't backwards compatible? I want to buy a next gen console but feel cheated that I can't play some of last gem's games I missed out on. Nintendo deserves a HUGE pat on the back for allowing you to play wii games on the wii u.

Yes, the prices

From a consumer's perspective, there is none.

because they would have to find a way to emulate it or include previous gen hardware in the console to play old games--increasing the cost

Apparently they don't want to increase the cost of the hardware to the consumer.

But that's bullshit. They just want to gouge the consumer and give them opportunity to buy games they already own again.

If people are already paying $30-50 for copies of games they already own, then a $50-100 increase in hardware costs to play their already large game libraries without impedance wouldn't be an issue. Nintendo can offer FULL software and hardware (peripheral) backwards compatibility with the Wii, and still be cheaper than either the PS4 or Xbone.

@foxhound_fox: How is that bullshit

I hate how people see backwards compatibility as a mandatory thing. Sure its a nice thing to have but if it raises the cost of the console Id rather not have it. I can count on one hand the amount of times I used backwards compatibility on my ps2 and ps3 combined.

I wonder what will be the excuse when they continue using the x86 architecture for the next gen consoles but they still don't provide BC for PS4 and Xb1.

It would be too expensive for Sony to do so. Emulate the cell processor? We're talking about untapped potential. How on earth would a ps4, a gimped overheating tyko toy plastic console, do such a thing. PS3 is more advanced hardware, in ways.

Just turn to Nintendo. It will likely play all past nintendo games.

wait,....the ps4 plays blu-rays just like the ps3, the xbox one plays blu rays and dvd's and 360 games were on dad's. I feel like they can just unlock it through an update

I think its a very consumer friendly thing to do with BC their last gen. consoles.

MS and PS say its because of cost, but i don't quite believe it. Maybe, but the Wii U has it this gen. Last gen, you'll ever see it again imo.

Because I think if you ask people if they would rather spend $30+ per title for new versions of games they already own, or an initial flat rate to play the games they already own... they'd go with the latter 9 times out of 10 (the one time accounting for the cows who love re-buying games they already own).

@ps4hasnogames: what does the ability to read a disc type have to do with playing games? By that logic the x1 should be able to play PS4 games because they're both bluray

Gives consumers less of a reason to buy new software.

For PS4, it's the Cell processor. For the X1 and the Wii U, i don't know...

It could happen in a form of emulation. Cant see it being an easy task though. I'd be content with just PS2, and original xbox BC support.

Most people who'd care for BC on new consoles probably already own old consoles, so why bump up the price on the new ones? It's also not a requirement to buy new versions of old games; remakes have been here for a long time and not everyone gets them. People get cheaper upfront consoles and the option to buy the versions of games they already own on their old consoles, as opposed to paying a higher cost upfront for BC with their old consoles still there.

It's what works. At any extent, only the idea of trade in of old consoles would push as many customers to buy a more expensive BC console (but then the companies gain nothing off that) as they have the cheaper non-BC ones.

@foxhound_fox: Because they switched architectures completely from their predecessors. I do think the move to Intel 86 will be good for the consoles in the long term, and in the future there will be no good excuse for successor consoles to not have backwards compatibility.

I doubt that a $500 PS4 which included a Cell processor for BC would sell particularly well. We went down that road with the PS3 in 2006 and, unfortunately, the console didn't sell well until they removed hardware BC, slimmed down the console and reduced costs.

Nintendo achieves full BC by using a PowerPC processor which, in many respects, is architecturally ancient and weaker than last gen CPUs.

If modern consoles have backwards compatibility, then the devs won't be able to charge players twice, or sometimes three times, for the same game and all its HD/Remaster editions.

I dont know but Sony and MS better find a way to stream our digitally purchased content from previous gen. Throw us a bone, would love to play all my xbox live arcade and psn arcade games again.

Because they want to sell games or allow others to simply sell them again? It was obvious this was the future when Cows creamed their jeans about GoW collection on PS3 after they removed BC.

They could easily went with a 2 model approach. One with BC and one without, I bet of the 10m sold PS4 now, a good number of those would be the BC model if offered.

PS3 early years didn't have the games to back it up and had the inferior multiplatform games. But at the same time, didn't the PS3 outsell the 360 worldwide since it release?

At the end of the day, this was all about re-releasing games, I mean how many re-releasing are out not now or coming soon for PS4/Xone?

First the hardware BC was likely to cut costs of the ps3, as it was 600 and nobody was buying it. Second, the God of War collection launched at 40 dollars, as with the other collection games that offered 3 plus games. Third, the games were stellar versions of past games which many people may have missed. Fourth, buying each individual ps2 game used would likely equate to around the same price--and probably more. I know people that bought these collection games for 15 to 20 dollars new. What's the problem?

Sorry, but most people aren't going to pay an extra $200. Especially if they already own a last generation console.

I never said it was the devil. I stated what many did back when it took place. I am not attacking you or Sony...........chill guy

" the God of War collection launched at 40 dollars, as with the other collection games that offered 3 plus games."

But now, TLOU is one game, a year old plus one DLC and its $50?

I am chill. It is just common sense.

The Last of Us is just bullshit, though. It was undoubtedly a rush job because there's no games on ps4. I am in no way defending it but it is a similar release to last gens "greatest hits" line. Still, it's bullshit and Sony knows they are in position to get head from all these brain washed console gamers. Hey Sony, where's psx backwards compatibility? Difficult to do? Yikes. Oh, what? Playstation Tv for that?

Damn these two xbox and playstation brands are going straight down the toilet. Nintendo has their quality design teams to back them. These other two don't for the most part.

That's when things started going awry.

I have no argument against it, I wish every new console I bought had it.

How else can they charge you to replay all of your PS3 library through PlayNOW, remasters or some such shit. Conveniently enough, you are also forced to buy something for your new system this way, no matter how terrible the launch window offering is.

There is no argument against. Its anti-consumer but the gaming community doesn't seem to give a piss.

No, this wasn't about re-releasing games. The PS4 would be a more appealing system if it were capable of playing PS3 games, plus software migration for consumers would be a lot easier. Every time Sony gets someone who never owned a PS3 (one third of PS4 owners) to make a PS4 purchase instead of a PS3 purchase, there's a huge back library of digital PS3 content that they are unable to sell to the consumer. Sony also has to deal with a dry first year for the PS4 on the market and is unable to take advantage of the fact that the PS3 is a better supported system or sell 360/PS3/PC exclusive games like South Park to new PS4 owners. PS Now was a bandaid solution because they couldn't provide digital BC in the first place.

PS Now and re-releases on PS4 are an attempt to compensate for the revenue lost from a PS4 not being backwards compatible and also to encourage next-gen adoption over last-gen adoption. Plus the Cell processor is cumbersome and its long-term future for Sony is uncertain, which means its parts are difficult to obtain [ Link ]. The PS4 is a small, sleek piece of hardware and a BC version of the console would almost certainly be bigger, "phatter", use more power and be less aesthetically pleasing.

A lot of misunderstanding in this thread...the reason the new consoles (except wii u) lack BC is because they use completely different architecture than their predecessors. Including the hardware to play the old games wouldn't be practical, not only would they have to put the old CPU/gpu on the motherboard they would have to figure out a way to handle memory access considering the different size and speed in the new gen consoles. Software emulation wouldn't work either because the CPU in the ps4 and xbone are way to weak for that.

All that would lead to a noticeable increase in cost, size, and heat output, none of which are desirable.

It's a pretty silly thing to criticize these companies over.

@SakusEnvoy: PS Now and re-releases on PS4 are an attempt to compensate for the revenue lost from a PS4 not being backwards compatible and also to encourage next-gen adoption over last-gen adoption.

Your whole comment I can easily dissect. But you mentioning PSnow is another example of the intentions not to have BC.

They're lazy, or they're trying to exploit the ability to capitalize on next gen ports.

Take Wii U for instance, Homebrew hackers can get GameCube games running on it no problem, though they have to use ROMs on an external HDD, the Wii U is more than capable at running them. The only limitation is the systems ability to utilize the GC discs.

Or there's the PS3, hackers there found that the PS2 games Sony sells on PSN are running on some kind of ISO-emulator hybrid file, that the emulator can be stripped and used to play other PS2 games on the PS3 just by using the PS2 ISO. Therefore, the PS2 is more than capable at doing BC emulation, but doesn't, they want to make money selling games instead of just releasing an emulator and selling the ISOs online.

With the PS4 and Xbox One, I'm sure hackers will eventually find BC is very doable on both system. Sony and MS will play dumb and pretend they can't do it in order to make you pay for some kind of premium service.

There's this amazing gaming device that features almost 100% backwards compatibility with thousands upon thousands of games going back decades. It's called a PC, you should check it out.

Yeah it seems the other two have CAPITALIZim first and foremost, if you get me. And its the consumer that is to blame. They cant do what they cant sell. I knew it the first time I saw an "HD collection"

It's all about the money. Although personally I think of backwards compatibility as a bonus and not something I feel entitled to.

No. Previous consoles were built on completely different architecture. The new console would require the hardware that the previous had inside it, or it would require complex software emulation - both of which cost money.

That was back then though. Now x86 and all subsequent architectures(x64) are backwards compatible. That shouldn't be an excuse next gen, but we will see.

For PS4, PSone compatibility really hasn't got much of an excuse. You don't need extra hardware, you just need the emulator which is basically already out there. PS2 is a bit nastier, but to my understanding it has been emulated too. PS3, no way in heck they could get that running without the hardware in the box, which would simply needlessly increase the price. If you're just going to pay more anyway, might as well just get the PS3 and be done with it.

For XB1, neither Xbox nor XB360 are really viable to emulate. So, again you end up with paying more for the hardware to be built in, and again it really comes down to if you're going to do that, why not simply buy the hardware directly to start with.

Is it also a bit of a cash grab, probably. However, in the end, is it a big selling point to have BC, not really. If it was WiiU would be doing a lot better, but it obviously isn't. Likewise you'd expect PS4 to be doing a fair bit worse, but it isn't.

software makers should have more rights to publish their games on new hardware, and I'm not talking about COD and Madden, I mean games like silent hill 2, metal gear solid 4, fallout 3...