I would agree if the PS4 actually had a good library.  It kind of sucks.  I mean I read multiple threads on this site praising Shadow of Colossus, for example, when it was released on PS4.  If the PS4's library is so good, then why are so many people praising Shadow of Colossus?  Don't they have better games than this one that came out two generations ago?  Guess not.

There are a lot of great PS2 and PS3 games that I don't want to buy again.  If Sony expects me to buy them again on PS4, then I'll just sell the PS4 and play the older versions of the game

No body is forcing u to buy those games or stopping u from selling ur PS4. Ms and playstation has very different aim.ms wants to focus more on features and online services.they want to sqeez everything out of their install base.on the hand PlayStation is only focusing on games and they are going to expand their gaming library through new IP.they don't give damn about backward compat because bc didn't do shit for ps3 and it won't do anything for xbox.theres a reason Xbox1 getting smoked by ps4 and that's reason is not backward features.

I also very much doubt that backwards compatibility is helping the X1's sales figures. I had a PS3 with the BC chip built in and I think I used it once in 10 years.

BC sounds like a great idea, but the vast majority of people don't use that feature and Microsoft is just using it to distract gamers from the fact the X1 lacks decent new IPs. Maybe this is a better example. Windows PCs are largely backwards compatible. How many PC gamers regularly, like on a weekly basis, load up Half Life, or Doom onto their PC to play it. Even if the PC gamer has the newest and best graphics card, I very much doubt they regularly play Doom on their all powerful PC. They play the latest games, more regularly, than they do BC games. I'm sure some PC gamers play BC games every once in a while. I sometimes like to load up Syndicate, but that wave of nostalgia hits me every 5 or more years. I really hope that Sony don't jump on the BC band wagon. Their strategy of providing compelling new IPs and better quality games is working. 

I also very much doubt that backwards compatibility is helping the X1's sales figures. I had a PS3 with the BC chip built in and I think I used it once in 10 years.

BC sounds like a great idea, but the vast majority of people don't use that feature and Microsoft is just using it to distract gamers from the fact the X1 lacks decent new IPs. Maybe this is a better example. Windows PCs are largely backwards compatible. How many PC gamers regularly, like on a weekly basis, load up Half Life, or Doom onto their PC to play it. Even if the PC gamer has the newest and best graphics card, I very much doubt they regularly play Doom on their all powerful PC. They play the latest games, more regularly, than they do BC games. I'm sure some PC gamers play BC games every once in a while. I sometimes like to load up Syndicate, but that wave of nostalgia hits me every 5 or more years. I really hope that Sony don't jump on the BC band wagon. Their strategy of providing compelling new IPs and better quality games is working. 

Darn multi-quote!

Looking at my PS4 library, quite a few games I've purchased for my current hardware are games I've owned last gen:

-Nathan Drake Collection

-Tomb Raider 2013

-Beyond Two Souls

-God of War 3

-Batman Arkham Asylum

-Batman Arkham City

-The Last of Us

These are games I own. Not just a list of games. I'm probably forgetting a few. These are games I've owned before on PS3 and purchased a second time on PS4. It only gets worse if you factor in my Xbox One games! I've repurchased games like Bioshock 1-3 and Resident Evil 4, 5, and 6. 

Last gen games have actually aged pretty well and I've probably got over 150 games that guy the backwards comp treatment. I know I'm in the minority but nothing is giving me more joy right now than replaying the entire Batman Arkham series on my Xbox One. I even stopped playing certain new high profile exclusives until I'm finished!

BC isn't a game changer and it might not even matter to a lot of people but I abuse the heck out of it. To me, a good game is a good game. I just want to play it when I can play it.

Buying remastered games on updated hardware really doesn't qualify as backwards compatibility as the game as been remade for the newer hardware. BC, by definition, is using current hardware to run software that was made for previous/old hardware and not using an emulator.

Can we talk about this article?

In my opinion the writer is disconnected with reality. Comparing the Xbox One today with the PS3 at the time of its comeback last gen is delusional to say the least.

First of all, the Ps3 came back because it was "natural". Once the big launch issue (price) was fixed, the continuous support, the variety of the games and the quality of the first party IPs, combined with the PlayStation image and the failure of other consoles in some or most of these areas, took it back. Not "risks", not BC (the opposite actually).

MS is doing nothing to come back except their own Pro console. Nothing indicates a real change to come back, new policies or anything groundbreaking. MS is rather in an acceptance position. They're losing and they're perfectly fine with it, completely opposite to Sony back then.

I don't get what the writer is trying to say...

He doesn't think XBO will make any type of comeback. He just says that being in second place makes them more willing to try different things. Whether or not being in second place was the reason for Sony's creativity last gen is something that can't be proven, though. They did make a lot of  changes, mostly for the better, though.

I think it's like Nintendo having to rethink their strategy after the GameCube and WiiU to win back fans. Then again, who knows how many years in advance companies have to work to put out a project? Anything M$, Sony, or Nintendo do to " make a comeback" could possibly be something they were planning to do anyway.

*shrugs*

My point is, what creativity from Sony?

They had to do a cheaper SKU because they failed on the price. They did the Move (which kinda failed), because it was the motion control moment. That's it!

How were they especially innovative? Because they made first party games? But they did first party games on PSOne and PS2, it didn't change. Because they had a variety of different games? Well, the PS2 was the console with the most various games ever, so nothing new.

Sony didn't have to be "creative" to comeback. They just fixed their price mistake and rested on their usual strengths : variety of games, quality of exclusives,  lifetime support, and brand recognition. 

That's why I talked about "natural". PlayStation beating Xbox is natural, even if they had the exact same console. Because everybody knows Playstation has strengths Xbox doesn't have. And they're not building it now.'