I'm sure they will, if only for BC.

BC is a just about a necessity going into next gen, thanks to PSN and XBL.  It'd be absolutely silly for Sony to allow you to play any ps1 titles you bought through the network on their next console, but not ps3/psn games.  Their next console should be compatible with everything that is compatible with the ps3.  They might even let you play psp games on ps4 in addition to psp2, given the psp won't be their primary handheld device anymore.

I'm sure we'll also see ps2 BC reappear again at some point via emulation, if not later this gen then at the latest the start of next gen.  Sony wants to sell ps2 games on the PSN, and the easiest way to facilitate that is via software emulation, which makes it very easy for publishers to bring their games to PSN, similar to making a disc-based ps3 game also available on PSN and playable via the HDD.

BC is a must, as PS4/X720 may be new hardware, but PSN/XBL are perpetual platforms that must be supported by all new hardware from here on out.

But what does that have to do with seeking out the input of developers when planning out the next console?  The architecture of previous Playstation consoles has always been known to be anything but developer friendly.  That has nothing to do with the other departments of Sony; that was a failure of SCE alone.  And who was at the head of this?  The father of the Playstation.  He's gone now, so Sony fans don't have that to worry about anymore.

They are copying Microsoft because this same approach is what MS took when planning the 360.

So why are you taking offense to this?  There's nothing to take offense to, man.  This is nothing but good news for the PS4.

Why didn't they do that before? |: 

But what does that have to do with seeking out the input of developers when planning out the next console?  

cause when your departments are separate and don't really exchange info then its bad.

its like you give another small company a contract and they will make a game for you but nothing else,no exchange of info

The architecture of previous Playstation consoles has always been known to be anything but developer friendly.  That has nothing to do with the other departments of Sony; that was a failure of SCE alone.

no it hasn't.the devs were complaining when PS2 first released but they soon silenced as PS2 was the main platform so they spent their entire time on a single console and so got used to it.

now when PS3 is not the main platform so developers don't really spend that much time on it and so when they do spend the little time porting games from the 360 version they find it difficult.

also because 360 is nothing but like PC,they try to compare it with the new architectured PS3 CELL processor.they keep whinning that they  have to spend more time on PS3 to know how to make it work

VALVE's Gabe Newell is a very very good example of whinning and bullshiting when you don't wanna work and just want to do the job on easy PC and 360 which they are used to.

 And who was at the head of this?  The father of the Playstation.  He's gone now, so Sony fans don't have that to worry about anymore.

"worry about anymore" - why the hell do you think it was all headed by him?

you guys just keep blaming him for the losses and PS3.

when it was SONY's decision to promote BLU-RAY which they knew would make them loss and for which Kuturagi would totally be against as it would take down his division.

and the CELL,it was necessary and what you aren't understanding is that they developed it to continue with the PS4 and other devices not just PS3.so by the time PS4 comes,devs will have understood it like the PC architecture so it will be much easier

They are copying Microsoft because this same approach is what MS took when planning the 360.

MS didn't take any such approach.they just consulted their DIRECT X software team.don't bullshit.

So why are you taking offense to this?  There's nothing to take offense to, man.  This is nothing but good news for the PS4.

wat offense,i am not taking any just discussing but straighten out your facts.i am just correcting th wrong ones you have

That's the point though - they want to be seen as the 'easy' platform this time so that future 'Left 4 Deads' etc aren't denied a playstation release and other multi-plats ala 'The Orange Box' aren't offloaded to other developers to fuck up handle. 

did you even read my article aboe,if PS4 were to be no.1 console then even if its difficult will master it as it will be where the money is like PS2.

now developers don't necesaerrily need to make for the PS3 as other consoles also have a big userbase.

and the LEFT 4 DEAD and THE ORANGE BOX had more to do with GABE NEWELL being an MS fanboy not PS3 being hard.

no new powerful hardware is easy as if its new then developers don't know how to develop for it and will need to learn first so that consumes alot of time.on the 360 side which is not much more than  an assembled PC where devs already knew how to develop so it will be easier no matter what

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/12066/Microsoft-to-Epic-You-Cost-Me-a-Billion-Dollars/

I remember reading this article, which claims that Epic cost MS a billion dollars because through their consultation prior to releasing the Xbox 360 they insisted upon 512MB of RAM instead of the 256MB they originally planned.  I don't believe Epic is part of the DIRECT X software team?

just one dev doesn't prove anything as it will only benefit that sole dev as they are thinking for their own games.

also there needs to be done much more from a developer contributing than just saying how much ram is needed.they should consult about the CPU and GPU architecture and effects,etc.

i am not saying that MS didn't try but only once thing and one dev does help being labled as they made the system.and you sholdn't on this basis say that SONY is copying MS.