Required 3D as an option on all games.

Was that a problem for the PS2? That system was launching on the heels of the number 1 console of all time. A console who's games the PS2 could natively play. Did it have an impact? No? Why is that? Could it be because Sony kicked ass on the sfotware side of things to the point where the competition couldn't keep up?

It bugs me that the most likely reason for Xbox One and PS4 to cut out such a great feature is so they could double dip 360/PS3 players and sell full price remasters to those who didn't buy the games the first time. It REALLY bugs me that Kaz lied to us all when he said in 2006 that as long as Sony was making consoles, BC would continue with each and every console going forward.

I honestly believe that companies lied to all of us about digital media to begin with. It was probably, from the start, just a way to keep people from selling used goods.

Games cost an astounding 5x the amoung that games cost to make 2 generations ago.

I know it's great for the consumer, but just buy a ps3. You like the console buy it. They sold ps3 for almost 400$ loss at launch.

#entitledgamers are real

That's like telling people who expect to use the internet on their phones to just go buy a laptop instead.

No it's like saying you can have a phone for 300$ and play lots of games etc, or you can buy a smart phone and have internet access.

I pay a premium for 15gb a month of internet access on a smartphone. I used to have a dumbphone that had lots of games but only wifi and phone calls. I spent more to get more.

What you're saying is we should be able to have the 300$ phone and have whatever we want for free. Sure that would be a great consumer friendly model, but it wouldn't help the people who make the phone.

No, it's exactly what I said. BC is something that improved gaming consoles. It's a feature that has no downside for the consumer and improves the value significantly. By removing it, these companies went BACK IN TIME.  

It would be like if Apple and Samsung decided to remove the internet from their phones because they can make more money selling laptops instead. In other words... down with progression, up with profits.

No, it's what I said.

Samsung makes smartphones and dumb phones. You want all the goodies you have to pay for it.

Obviously there is no downside to the consumer, but Sony quoted the price of just physically having bc as 35$ per console, on top of lost profits on games. It's not even about remakes. It's about PS2 having a huge library of games, easily procured as used games, because stores don't have enough physical spare to hold multiple generations of new games. It's probably in the 80-100$ range of cost. Machine makers sell their consoles at a loss to sell new games, and BC severely impedes that.

It was a great feature on ps2. It was a godly feature on ps3, but even then it still didn't play ALL the games. Because emulation can only go so far. It's a lot of investment, on top of having to code the damn thing and have developers working on keeping a service that is in all actuality costing them money ALREADY.

All it would cost you, the consumer, to play these games is a used ps3 or 360 for maybe 100-150 dollars. And you can buy all the cheap used games you want.

It would be like releasing a phone completely unlocked with a massive contract discount. That's not how things work. You want a contract phone unlocked you gotta pay more for it. Then you get all the games you want.

In gaming (PS1, PS2, 360, Wii, PS3, Wii-U, GBA, DS, 3DS) that is EXACTLY how things worked (and still work in the case of Nintendo). Again, it's called progression and in the case of Sony and MS, they have said TO HELL WITH PROGRESSION. Things just don't go backwards in tech. That's what is so messed up here because that's exactly what's happening. We aren't better off because of the loss of BC.

They are.

No we aren't better off. It is a loss, but compare that loss to how much of a loss and gamble these companies take on a daily basis. BC hurts the industry. You have no idea the ripple effects. New devs have to sell new games to stay in business. If you have access to anything you want, it takes a good chunk of that profit away. You know that almost 40% of purchases go to used games? 40%!! WIth BC it would be even higher because it would be easier for the consumer to just buy a used game. But just look at last gen. We've had many MANY devs shutter because one game destroyed them.

You're asking for them to take all the risk.

I know BC is a great feature. Don't think I don't know that. But I also know that in perfect economics you need a solution that satisfies everyone. You spend too much time and effort satisfying the consumer and you will be bankrupt before you know it. Meanwhile, Sony and MS give you games and huge discounts all the time. Sales left and right. Games come down to 30$ within months.

And don't even get me started on how much it would cost Sony to emulate a different chipset. It would be at least 50$ per console to run ps3 games on it. I was a completely different architecture. Sony, a company who was on the verge of bankruptcy just a few years ago. Who have hacked off so many parts of their company to stay afloat. You want them to take another loss, in the only sector that is doing well.

It just reminds me of that old joke about ps3. When you bought a ps3, you actually hurt Sony more than you helped it. 400$ loss. Can you even begin to imagine what that must have been like? It's unrecoverable. Sony makes about 15$ per new third party game and 30 per first party. Each person would have had to buy 13+ first party games, which at that point, wouldn't even cover the cost of making the games itself....at 8-10m a pop.

Make it more balanced.