Runa216 said: Maybe I'm just in the minority here, but I really don't see much reason to go back to PS1/2 games. Not to say they can't be good, and I'm CERTAINLY not a graphics whore (the games I play the most lately outside of Elden Ring are pixel platformers like Terraria, The Messenger, Shovel Knight, and Kaze and the Wild Masks...you know, stuff like that), but like, N64, PS1, and PS2 games have not held up. Every time I go back to them I think, "Man, these games are a lot better in my memory than they actually are." SNES games held up. Gamecube games held up. NES games mostly hold up. Genesis games mostly hold up. A lot of old games hold up, but a lot of games from the 5th and 6th generation of consoles (The PS1 and PS2 era, alongside N64, Gamecube, and original Xbox) really haven't held up well at all. They just feel like inferior, clunky versions of better games. |
You are not alone, I don't care much about BC and even Sony numbers showed them that most customers didn't care and thus was why PS4 had 0 BC in contrast with PS2 and original release of PS3. But seems like there have been more people wanting it (still Sony said that the PS+ Premium is expected to have a very minor number of subs because they still see that as a niche market). But it is good that if they are going to do BC to do as best as they can while generating profits to them.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
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"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."