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

Forums - Sony Discussion - The PS4 really should have backwards compatibility!

CGI-Quality said:
VGPolyglot said:

I don't think I ever claimed that the PS4 needed backwards compatibility to succeed, it would make the console better overall though.

I didn’t say you did. I’m saying that it’s not as necessary as you believe it is.

Necessary in what way? Obviously I don't think it's necessary as the PS4 functions without it, but I do think the PS4 would be better with it.



Around the Network
VGPolyglot said:
CGI-Quality said:

I didn’t say you did. I’m saying that it’s not as necessary as you believe it is.

Necessary in what way? Obviously I don't think it's necessary as the PS4 functions without it, but I do think the PS4 would be better with it.

And that’s what I’m saying. I don’t think it would matter that much. So that’s where it is a stalemate.



                                                                                                                                                           

CGI-Quality said:
VGPolyglot said:

Necessary in what way? Obviously I don't think it's necessary as the PS4 functions without it, but I do think the PS4 would be better with it.

And that’s what I’m saying. I don’t think it would matter that much. So that’s where it is a stalemate.

Matter that much in what sense?



People keep saying "why do you want to replay old games". I had a PS3 for 4 months, so it would be pretty nice if I could play Ni No Kuni or P4Arena on my ps4.



Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda Muda!!!!


flashfire926 said:
DonFerrari said:

Every single R&D cost money and they will have to get it back, it will be charged  in products... and the way you asked on the OP it is more like PS4 should have been developed with BC in mind. So that cost of R&D and manufacturing would be part of the cost of the console that everyone who buys, wanting BC or not would have to pay.

All of that is pretty, still on console field so far BC have been more like a token than of significance... sure enough that I don't even consider BC on PC since PCs are BC and FC for decades depending on your build.

From what we know X1 on the months after release of BC had an average of 5m per user who used BC on it.

Sure for me I would like PS4 to have BC on all gens before and wouldn't mind paying the extra cost, but I understand the lack of market interest and that Sony would lose more than win with it.

He isn't forced to buy a console for sure, but if you just have the PS4 with BC, then the cost to make BC is charged on it and he can't avoid it and buy a PS4 without it (as going by the discussion premises).

A lot of people were bothered with the extra cost of the kinect they didn't want and you saw what that brought to MS. We also know that PS2 BC on PS3 costed them between 50-100 on the console and it was another point to make it a harder sale on the start of gen.

True. Fair point. But the PS3 and PS2  were very different architectures, so it took much more to implement it. Now, with PS5 most likely going to have X86 architecture with AMD based cpu/gpu (just like the PS4), that cost will likely be well below 50 bucks. Think of how Wii had gamecube BC while only being $249. Or XBO, PS2, GBA, early DS, 3DS, etc.

Sure, perhaps Sony can do PS5 BC with PS1-4 for very little added cost (we won't know before hand), still there will be people that will say that they would rather pay 30 or even 10 bucks less and buy without BC for whatever reason =p

I only have PS3 and PS4 original games, PS1 and 2 weren't sold officially in Brazil. But even like this I haven't put a PS3 disc to play since I got PS4.

Pemalite said:
GOWTLOZ said:

The PS4 CPU isn't much more powerful than a Cell CPU not enough to emulate it. My PC argument was to prove my point. There is lots of interest in PS3 emulation and huge support for it but its a difficult job. Sony can't make the PS4 hardware do wonders there are physical limits to what the PS4 can do.

The Playstation 4's CPU is significantly ahead of the Cell in anything that is not single precision, iterative refinement.
That means, integers, half precision, single precision, double precision will all be significantly better on Jaguar.

With that in mind... The overall performance gap between the Xbox 360 and Xbox One is significantly smaller than the Playstation 3 and Playstation 4... Microsoft still managed to pull it off by approaching the issue from multiple different angles.

I think people get the idea that emulating games on console is somehow going to be the same kind of situation on PC, when that simply isn't the case, Microsoft and Sony can get away with allot less overhead in their Emulation attempts.

GOWTLOZ said:

They don't have a magic wand to make PS4 powerful enough to emulate a PS3. I doubt you understand just how weak the Jaguar CPU on the PS4 is and the difficulty of emulating a very different architecture on hardware that's not vastly superior to the hardware you want to emulate.

It would be possible on the PS5 if it has a Zen CPU there's no doubt about that. PS4 just no.

Before you try and insult VGPolyglot's intellectual fortitude... Go look up Binary Translation, Virtualization, Code Morphing... And then come back... Especially look at what nVidia/Transmeta was attempting with Denver.

VGPolyglot said:

The PS4 is more powerful than a PS3, the argument that since PCs can't run it does sound fine, but even original Xbox games don't have solid emulators on the PC, despite the fact that the 360 had some BC support and the Xbox One does too:

 

Playstation 3 emulator is better than the 360 emulator on PC anyway.

DonFerrari said:

From what we know X1 on the months after release of BC had an average of 5m per user who used BC on it.

Hence my "Millions" claim. :)

flashfire926 said:

True. Fair point. But the PS3 and PS2  were very different architectures, so it took much more to implement it. Now, with PS5 most likely going to have X86 architecture with AMD based cpu/gpu (just like the PS4), that cost will likely be well below 50 bucks. Think of how Wii had gamecube BC while only being $249. Or XBO, PS2, GBA, early DS, 3DS, etc.

Just because they retain the same x86 Architecture doesn't mean that native backwards compatibility will not be broken.

There are so many other links in the chain that can break native backwards compatibility... Otherwise Microsoft would have had it baked in hardware from the outset on the Xbox One for the Original Xbox, rather they still had to do a ton of extra work and roll it out for specific games.

Same can happen with Next Gen... Especially as Ryzen is a significantly different uArch to Jaguar... And Navi could have some major deviations from the Graphics Core Next 1.0 derived parts on the Xbox One/Playstation 4.
Plus you have some custom parts of the SoC's as well, which may be removed. - For example on the Xbox One, Microsoft retained native hardware support for a few Xbox 360 features, some Xbox One developers may leverage some of that to a degree if it is exposed and beneficial.

Plus we may see a dramatic shift at the API and hardware level as we transition to Ray Tracing.

The 5m is a reference to 5 minutes, not 5M as 5 Millior users. So BC was so relevant to the X1 players that they didn't even play much when they got it.

reviniente said:
DonFerrari said:

It cost money to develop and make the BC on the console, the customers are the ones that are going to pay for it one way or another.

Ironically, the only ones paying (again, I might add) are the ones having to buy games they already own.

And those who buy it again chose to. If someone doesn't want BC on the console he can't buy it without (at least there haven't been options with or without being sold at the same time... well except old stock from PS3 when it transitioned).

Arminillo said:
People keep saying "why do you want to replay old games". I had a PS3 for 4 months, so it would be pretty nice if I could play Ni No Kuni or P4Arena on my ps4.

Keeping your PS3 for more than 4 months would have helped on it.



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."

Around the Network

Those are rookie XBO numbers! I did the same but didn't install the Xbox 360 version of games that had an Xbox One version.

Currently 310 games installed.
144 Xbox 360 and Xbox games
166 Xbox One games.

18 "ready to install" games (Limbo, Perfect Dark, Walking Dead, etc).

😎



Twitter: @d21lewis

pokoko said:
"Allow" isn't the right term at all. They would have to spend a lot of money for a team to reprogram all those games to work with the PS4. They have no incentive to do that, especially not this late in the life-cycle of the PS4.

Microsoft did it as a PR move because they were desperately trying to recover from the XO launch. Sony was never in that position and, to be quite honest, the fact that it didn't hinder PS4 sales probably indicates that it's not all that important to the average consumer. Sony going the Microsoft route at this point would likely do very little to increase unit sales.

If it was going to happen then it would have happened before now.

Bingo. 

Just realizing that I missed this early on.



                                                                                                                                                           

DonFerrari said:

The 5m is a reference to 5 minutes, not 5M as 5 Millior users. So BC was so relevant to the X1 players that they didn't even play much when they got it.

I would actually need to see that data.
If they took the playtime data from a small selection of players and extrapolated those numbers against the entire Xbox user base... Then of course those numbers will seem paltry.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:

The 5m is a reference to 5 minutes, not 5M as 5 Millior users. So BC was so relevant to the X1 players that they didn't even play much when they got it.

I would actually need to see that data.
If they took the playtime data from a small selection of players and extrapolated those numbers against the entire Xbox user base... Then of course those numbers will seem paltry.

Would take some time to find the right source, so if you prefer to dismiss no issue. But the story was that they had some amount (millions) of players that started some of the BC game or mode (don't know exactly how it is started on X1) and also had a amount of some million minutes or something like that... and if you divided both numbers it averaged on 5 minutes per player, from which we could infer a lot of people just started and didn't even play and a lot also probably played like 30 min just to see what it was about and fewer really played BC to a significant extension of time. Sure it may have changed in the 1 year after with a lot more games being released on the BC but I haven't seem any news on that effect.

 

Here is what I can find on short search https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/06/backward-compatible-xbox-360-games-are-less-than-2-of-xbox-one-usage-time/

Edit: My math on the numbers where off, but still a low usage.



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."

Pemalite said:
GOWTLOZ said:

The PS4 CPU isn't much more powerful than a Cell CPU not enough to emulate it. My PC argument was to prove my point. There is lots of interest in PS3 emulation and huge support for it but its a difficult job. Sony can't make the PS4 hardware do wonders there are physical limits to what the PS4 can do.

The Playstation 4's CPU is significantly ahead of the Cell in anything that is not single precision, iterative refinement.
That means, integers, half precision, single precision, double precision will all be significantly better on Jaguar.

With that in mind... The overall performance gap between the Xbox 360 and Xbox One is significantly smaller than the Playstation 3 and Playstation 4... Microsoft still managed to pull it off by approaching the issue from multiple different angles.

I think people get the idea that emulating games on console is somehow going to be the same kind of situation on PC, when that simply isn't the case, Microsoft and Sony can get away with allot less overhead in their Emulation attempts.

GOWTLOZ said:

They don't have a magic wand to make PS4 powerful enough to emulate a PS3. I doubt you understand just how weak the Jaguar CPU on the PS4 is and the difficulty of emulating a very different architecture on hardware that's not vastly superior to the hardware you want to emulate.

It would be possible on the PS5 if it has a Zen CPU there's no doubt about that. PS4 just no.

Before you try and insult VGPolyglot's intellectual fortitude... Go look up Binary Translation, Virtualization, Code Morphing... And then come back... Especially look at what nVidia/Transmeta was attempting with Denver.

VGPolyglot said:

The PS4 is more powerful than a PS3, the argument that since PCs can't run it does sound fine, but even original Xbox games don't have solid emulators on the PC, despite the fact that the 360 had some BC support and the Xbox One does too:

 

Playstation 3 emulator is better than the 360 emulator on PC anyway.

DonFerrari said:

From what we know X1 on the months after release of BC had an average of 5m per user who used BC on it.

Hence my "Millions" claim. :)

flashfire926 said:

True. Fair point. But the PS3 and PS2  were very different architectures, so it took much more to implement it. Now, with PS5 most likely going to have X86 architecture with AMD based cpu/gpu (just like the PS4), that cost will likely be well below 50 bucks. Think of how Wii had gamecube BC while only being $249. Or XBO, PS2, GBA, early DS, 3DS, etc.

Just because they retain the same x86 Architecture doesn't mean that native backwards compatibility will not be broken.

There are so many other links in the chain that can break native backwards compatibility... Otherwise Microsoft would have had it baked in hardware from the outset on the Xbox One for the Original Xbox, rather they still had to do a ton of extra work and roll it out for specific games.

Same can happen with Next Gen... Especially as Ryzen is a significantly different uArch to Jaguar... And Navi could have some major deviations from the Graphics Core Next 1.0 derived parts on the Xbox One/Playstation 4.
Plus you have some custom parts of the SoC's as well, which may be removed. - For example on the Xbox One, Microsoft retained native hardware support for a few Xbox 360 features, some Xbox One developers may leverage some of that to a degree if it is exposed and beneficial.

Plus we may see a dramatic shift at the API and hardware level as we transition to Ray Tracing.

I didn't say that Jaguar isn't more powerful than the Cell but the performance difference isn't there to emulate the Cell architecture and it is known to be very complicated and more different to the x86 architecture than the PowerPC architecture in the 360. Where did I insult his intelligence? He seems to not have knowledge about various architectures which I do to some degree and appears to consider emulation to be independent of the ability of the hardware which it is not. I was just telling him that, it surely has nothing to do with intelligence as microprocessor architecture isn't common knowledge.