PS3 emulation on PC is far better than Xbox 360, seems the "architecture" isn't a hindrance at all.

Besides it's PowerPC, you would be surprised how well these consoles translate over to modern x86 chips thanks to the threading counts and SIMD instructions.

Yeah, there is a business case to 'remaster' but the Xbox One/Series X is getting the remasters on top of backwards compatibility, it's about consumers in the end, not excuses from big multi-billion dollar companies.

Funny, we're over here actually playing PSVita/PS3 games and we weren't complaining about Sony shuttering their respective stores. Just an interesting twist, I suppose. 

I, too, was pretty anti-digital for years. I made a big deal about not giving in to the digital storefronts and making sure I always bought physical where I could. (as in, if it had a physical copy, I got that without exception). But then....the Switch was my turning point. Since it's portable AND a home console, I liked having my library of games on the system at all times. I re-bought a handful of games I bought physically (like the Mega Man Legacy collections and various other indies like Axiom Verge), and from there I sorta....fell off the physical wagon. After that, I started re-buying all my PS4 games digitally starting with Bloodborne and Rock Band (Games I regularly returned to and thus didn't wanna keep swapping the discs for) because I got an external hard drive, and now of my 140 PS4 games, I think I own something like 70 of them digitally as well. I keep the physical games for my collection and for my display, but then I also pick up digital when they're on sale for convenience. 

Between the Switch and PS4, I have more or less been converted. I can see myself still getting physical games, but my primary looks to be digital now. There isn't a PS5 game I own that I don't have digitally. Demon's Souls, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, and Spider-Man Miles morales I have physically AND digitally, but everything else is only digital. To be fair, many of those games (Borderlands 3, Final Fantasy VII Remake, Nioh 1/2, etc) were games I have physically on PS4 but got the digital version on PS5. IT's complicated. 

But once I got those external hard drives and SDXC cards with room to spare, I've been seeing the value of digital. 

No idea where this thread was going, but IS aw some similarities between us and thought I'd comment on it. 

Well Sony certainly could do the emulator (and possibly have something on that regard), but from their several speeches they have mapped that although highly asked for it is rarely used so it is unlikely that they will put it until they can see that let`s say on Xbox a lot of people are using it. They make a lot more money selling remasters and remakes.

The most reliable data point (Rather than an arbitrary statement by Sony or Microsoft) is "Xbox 360 games account for 2.3 per cent of total backward compatibility playtime."

That was data obtained via Ars Technica.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/06/xbox-unleashed-our-deep-dive-study-of-how-millions-use-xbox-live/

However Ars also goes on to state that their numbers could be skewed incorrectly.

However... Whilst Sony states that Backwards Compatibility is "insignificant" Microsoft goes on the books to state: "Usage remains high” and that quality games last and are worth playing”."
https://www.mcvuk.com/business-news/publishing/data-questions-popularity-of-xbox-backwards-compatibility/

Xbox chief marketing officer Mike Nichols pointed out that around half of Xbox One owners have tried backwards compatibility, clocking up over 508m play hours in the process, which does seem to be a pretty good uptake.

So who do you believe? I personally believe neither because it's irrelevant.

Sony hasn't had reliable backwards compatibility uptake numbers in modern times as the last console that had backwards compatibility were the fat Playstation 3's... That was over a decade ago.
Games are a bit different today, the leaps are not as pronounced between generations.

Either way, my personal view is... I don't care about the business side of the equation, but what is best for the consumer? And that is certainly backwards compatibility.
Thankfully the Xbox Series X is backwards compatible with all Xbox One titles and the Playstation 5 is backwards compatible with all Playstation 4 titles, so obviously Backwards compatibility is important to these companies otherwise they would have walled things off... Making any prior statement about backwards compatibility uptake entirely redundant.

One thing we need to keep in mind is that Backwards compatibility is also about video game preservation...
And let's be frank here, with the Playstation 3 emulators going ahead in leaps and bounds, the extreme maturity of PS1 and PS2 emulators, Sony could take that base, improve upon it and bring backwards compatibility to the PS4/PS5 with relatively little effort and cost... The bulk of the hard work has already been done for them. (Or allow the emulators on the app store or something.)

Either way, just my 2 cents. I'm a PC gamer, so backwards compatibility has been a natural thing for decades now.

All's well that ends well.
Anyway, luckily on PC I can be a retro gamer, on hot summers even a naked retro gamer, without asking for MS permission, without MS even knowing.

They shouldn't have given in, it must be hard to maintain those old "libraries" of theirs.