Wow that was the most close minded thing I've read in a while. I would absolutely love for Sony to bring back backwards compatibility and it's not just for nostalgia it's so I can organise my collection. I'm a collector with over a dozen different consoles and hundreds of games and one of the best things Sony could do right now imo is allow me to transfer my ps1, 2 and 3 data to my PS4 and unhook a couple of my older consoles. I have 0 issue keeping my PS4 hooked up when the ps5 releases but I would greatly prefer to have 1 PlayStation under my TV as opposed to 4 

I agree. Most gamers agree. Sony... on the other hand, does not. Why? They had PS Now to sell and that was suppose to be the hook. They were going to leverage BC so you'd buy into it. It didn't end up working that way and when Microsoft showed the world that it was easy to do, even via emulation, Sony ended up being as exposed as a new born baby.

Hopefully they learned their lesson and the PS5 will be full hardware BC and we shall never speak of this bullshit again.

Laugh as much as you want. How Microsoft handles BC on Xbox One is more consumer friendly than the PS2 Remasters on PS4.

If you already own the Xbox or 360 disc, you can play the game on Xbox One or Xbox One X for free without buying the digital version.

Also every 360 game you get with GWG stays activated after the subscription runs out, only the XBO games have an expiry date. On the other hand, all PS+ games have an expiry date, even old PS3 titles.

It would be nice for those who want to play older games. But it's not there and I think most people don't care. I've heard a minimal number of people clamoring for the ability to play PS3 games. In all my years of gaming (since 1987) the only game I've ever played through BC is God Of War II and that's because it was released on the tail end of PS2 and I'd not finished it yet when I got my PS3.

It depends on what you believe the motive was. If you believe they left it out because they really thought no one would want it, then sure. If, on the other hand, you believe they left it out to try to sell a streaming service, then yes... there is a big lesson to learn. On top of that, they underestimated Microsoft's ability to play a good PR game. If you remember, both of them were in agreement at the onset that BC was simply not doable because of the architecture changes. It was a lie of course... but they both towed the line. Once the PS4 starting taking names, that tune changed and Microsoft showed everyone the truth... that is was not only doable, but able to be done well.

Sony once said that the Playstation family of consoles would always feature BC "forever". It's time they went back and kept that vow and made good on those words.

What lesson should they learn? To make their consoles BC and periodically update older games to work on the newer consoles? Or should they keep making big budget sequels and new IPs? The console that touts BC is always the console shift the fewest units. How can you take that as BC being so important? I'm not saying Sony shouldn't add it. I'm saying that it's not that importation. Most gamers agree.

The lesson is, don't lie to people about something the other guy can easily expose as a lie. They both said it was impossible because of system architecture. That was pure bullshit. 

I like to hold people to their words. If they lie to me, I take offense. Call me old fashioned.

Calm yourself. I was only laughing at MS being in the same sentence as "consumer friendly".

Then don't play them. It really is that simple.
But removing choice is not a good thing.

Except... A massive chunk of the PSN library is old games. Only REAL difference is... If you have purchased the games prior, either digitally or physically, you get it for free on the Xbox One.
Your apologetic point of view really isn't an appropriate argument though.

I am at 121 games, but that is just digital.
Probably over the 300~ mark if I bothered to drop my physical games in.

I just want to keep my Xbox One  X as a pure digital machine though so I don't have to deal with Discs.

Just because something is stated "countless times" doesn't mean it is true.
I could point to a plethora of "wives tales" that reinforces that fact.

The Playstation 3 emulator on PC actually runs better than the Xbox 360 emulator... And not every game actually leverages the Cell to it's fullest anyway.

However, Sony could have taken Microsoft's approach to emulation, which isn't just strictly emulation, there is virtualization, there is some repackaging, there is abstraction and more... The Xbox One does feature a few Xbox 360 tech natively in the SoC which aids in emulation as well, but that could be abstracted on the Playstation 4 I guess.

In short though... It does require a ton of software engineering, which is Microsoft's forte'.

False.
Because a few standards/features on the Xbox 360 were implemented into the Xbox One chip to aid with backwards compatibility... Which means Microsoft likely planned backwards compatibility well before the generation was started.

Not only that... But Microsoft's Multi-OS virtualization environment on the Xbox One played a role as well.

Microsoft did it. And the power difference between the Xbox One and Xbox 360 is probably allot smaller and the architectural differences just as great.

Correlation doesn't equate to causation, that would be a logical fallacy and thus can be discarded.

The Playstation 4 does have the extra GPU resources to offload some tasks done on the SPU's, onto CU's though.
Either way, Microsoft has some amazing engineers and should be applauded for their efforts.