By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
twintail said:
DonFerrari said:

Sony games aren't heavy on mp much less gaas so their online may not benefit from bc.

And I have no problem accepting there is a good chance of BC or the goodwill they could get or even how much easier than ps3 bc it would be. But giving it as certain based on nothing is silly.

We have had Sony heads saying how BC was overtalked and underused as a reason they didn't put it on PS4 nor would add later. We had PS3 dropping BC without much issue.

Sony certainly could make PS5 BC capable and locking it with some service of PS+ or offering to easy port/crossgen to devs so they can either have cross sales as we had at the begining of this gen and even keeping username/save so people could migrate.

There is several options they could take that would benefit their partners more than just put free BC and no double dips.

Sony wasn't the only making remaster/remakes (and they selling a lot), they had a good bunch of 3rd parties doing the same.

It doesn't matter that Sony games this gen aren't MP or GaaS heavy. They get a cut from any 3rd party content off PSN. It is the 3rd party MP and GaaS heavy games that are important. There are +- 33.9M PS+ subscriptions: you think the majority of this are ppl subbing to play these nonMP/ GaaS Sony games? Of course not. Hence why ensuring these users stick with PS5 straight from PS4 is so important.

There is no goodwill for offering BC (though of course that naturally comes as a consequence). It is a business decision that ensures they maintain their userbase, which is what they need to continuing making money off their network division.

And? It is called PR. Of course no Sony head is going to say anything overly positive about BC when they themselves don't actually offer such functionality on the PS4 at this time. A dual narrative like that would only confuse matters. Likewise the drop of BC from PS3 being not much issue is mostly attributive to the fact that the PS3 was expensive. The drop is price to make the console more affordable outweigh any cons of losing BC. You can't just simply ignore other reasons surrounding these moves.

They could. These are possibilities that could exist. What is more important to Sony is that they retain users from the PS4 than what their publishers want. The next XB is going to have BC with X1, obviously. Nintendo will most likely just reiterate on the Switch. What sway do publishers have on Sony that Sony would not offer BC? Absolutely nothing especially with Sony in such a dominate position. You don't see EA dropping PS support, or not giving Sony marketing deals etc just because Sony refuses to put EA Access on their platform. It is less relevant for publishers to have the games bought again because of how much money they are making off microtransactions. You only have to look at companies like Ubisoft who are making a large sum of profit off microtransactions because of Player Reoccurring Investment (PRI). This is exactly what Sony will want: PRI, because ppl buying digitally on PSN and continuing to do so just means more money for them. Not gating off PS4 PSN access only aids this. Not having BC is actually more of a detriment at this stage.

Ok, so where is this huge library of remasters that Sony is investing in for PS4? or even 3rd parties? Are all of these games making their respective companies hefty profits? You bring up this point but still fail to back up with anything. 

Yes I know the subs are for MP that mostly isn't from Sony. And we have seem crossplay also being just some complaining point but without any real impact. So there really isn't hard evidence to prove that without BC or crossplay among PS4-PS5 crew it would be a major down point to PS5.

It may be silly but people buy new HW to play new games.

There is nothing to suggest that having BC gives you continuity on userbase. PS3 had BC and no continuity, PS4 didn't have BC and had continuity on userbase.

On the PR, you asked for evidence. We have Sony saying (and they didn't need at all), we have MS numbers showing BC wasn't much used.

On Sony we have from top of mind and making big sales Uncharted Collection, GoW3, TLOU on PS4 (Sly Coopers, Ratchet and Clank, Jak and Daxter on PS3), Crash N'Sane and Spyro on third parties, plus Sega, Atari, and some other collections, FF VII and FF IX enhanced versions, FF X/X-2, FF XII. This just from memory. And probably higher than all of those GTA V.

Even Nintendo and MS have made a lot of remasters, it isn't out of nowhere that people were saying this was the gen of remaster or joking on Sony doing only remasters.

vivster said:
DonFerrari said:

Even if console made a magic and were stronger than the strongest PC HW at the time of release on Sony and MS plus most of 3rd parties they would prefer 30fps standard as have been the history of gaming since ever. PS360>Wii PS4X1>WiiU+Switch still most games on Sony MS plat have been 30fps even though they were much stronger than Nintendo HW that were pushing 60fps games.

Correct. They'd actually be stupid if they were actively trying to get their customers used to a higher standard when the very low standard they've been rolling with has sold gangbusters and requires very little money and resources for them.


We will certainly see 4k60fps games from arcadey titles, fighting games, racing, some MP, etc. But Sony 1st party will certainly rather have 30fps with higher IQ (or console with weaker CPU and fuck off 60fps intention anyway) than higher frame count on SP games and movie narrative games.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."