code.samurai said:
Ok now I see where you're clearly wrong. Your reasoning is quite twisted, let me untangle it for you. You say that when people would buy their new consoles that are selling at a loss and will not be buying any more new software because their content with their collection. Hence the profit from new software will not be carried over. I can see how stupid executives at Sony may think like that, but thankfully they have market research to prove otherwise. Here are reasons why Sony did not maintain BC with PS2/1 a. Greed Dreaming of profiting in the next gen era, thinking that their new console will totally blow away PS2/1 that people won't care about last gen. As proven by PS2/1 DLC sales, people do care. I doubt people will have the patience to download MGS4, do you? b. They want to sell bluray games at a premium. PS2 games were selling at $40 a pop, that just won't cover the cost of developing HD games, hence it make sense. c. DVD is a highly pirated disc format. Sticking PS2/1 compatibility could compromise the PS3's security as pirating DVDs is common practice nowadays, clever hackers can develop a DVD piracy mode easily. d. Graphics quality of SD games on HD screens would compromise the perception of PS3. Face it, upscaled SD graphics still suck. Most PS2 games does not even support progressive scan and those that do have black bars. Have you ever played those emulated PS1 games? They're quite painful to play through on an HD screen.
Now let's compare it to PS3 -> PS4 transition a. They can't be greedy anymore now that they know they can fail. b. They're now selling PS3 bluray games at a premium, I highly doubt they can sell more expensive games for crisper graphics in PS4, don't you? c. Their nextgen will still use Bluray, a format that's very secure. d. Graphics quality, much higher but still all HDTVs will support 720p and 1080p in about 10 years from now. This means from the customer's perspective there would not be anything wrong with the graphics from older PS3 games.
So that basically covers the major issues, I'm sure you can think of some minor quibble because I'm sure I would just to save face. I'd rather save time than write another detailed response. |
Seriously? Seriously?
Sigh.
PS1 is backwards combatible with all consoles. Sony also seen that PS2 and PS1 was not sought after with PS3. Surveys, PSN monitoring to see usage with PS2 and PS1 was sad for them. They could either keep in the CPU and GPU from PS2 for full PS2 combatiblity, or take that out and instantly cut the price 100$ to manufacture, since only a neich audience were buying and using those features, and people were constantly complaining about the pirce. PS1 and PS2 also sold at a loss. The only reason PS1 BC is still in is because it is so easy to emulate it, otherwise it'd probably be cut.
Games have gotten cheaper over the year, not more expensive. Cartridges were 70-100 dollars in some cases, remember that? I LOVE that the price went up. Companies deserve that extra to cover the costs, and game prices should of rose, not fall, but no one is going to pay 250 per game, so it had to go down. More for less, is how the game industry has been going. MSRP for PS2 games was 49.99 not 39.99 yet it dropped recently. Blu-ray is also a newer technology and producing it costs quite a bit more. So more costs for devs, much higher costs infact 4-5 times the cost, and you expect the pay the same? Be lucky we only have a 10$ increse at 50-60$ a game.
Impossible to hack the PS3 as of yet, however a trick does exist to play PS2 back ups from swap magic, but it still has some problems.
SD games look better when upscaled, you can't create something that would actually CHANGE the game, all it does is stretch and anti alias.
They are not greedy either, however they are for-profit, and they will get that profit in the long run, they know if they take the hit now they can profit later.
Ps4 we will see something along the lines of the WII which is the only thing I am agreeing about. It will be stronger, not by much in processing terms. We see a 40x power increase from PS2 to PS3(CPU wise), we might see a 2-5x power increase this time around CPU wise and say doubling of GPU. Where we will see the increase is 1 gig of XDR for cell, and 512 for a newer RSX, or a new GPU architecture all together. We need to increase read speed, 2x is a joke for streaming games, HD content sure, but games... Sigh. I dream of a PS4 using CELLx2(14 SPE at 900 Mhz 2 PPC based 3.2 Ghz cores(Cell is PPC at 2.4 and SPEs at 700 mhz, and 7 to 1 ratio) and a GPU based on matured nividia GTS 300 architecture when it releases, 1024 MB XDRx2(3.6 Ghz 8 bit pipeline ram) for CPU, and 512 GDDR5 for GPU. That would hand anything you throw at it. It could even handle portups, PS3 games running natively, as if they were coded for it(same architecture) but running more smoothly at a higher framerate. 1080p would finally be the standard then to.
Oh also.
PS1 - Introducing devs to 3d and getting consoles devs used to it ETC
PS2 - Perfecting 3d design etc.
PS3 - Introducting console devs to newer concepts such as procedual textures and HD and getting them used to it.
PS4 - Perfecting using HD etc.
