Backwards Compatibility & Preserving Legacies

[Everz00]

The recent announcement of XBOX (https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/05/28/xbox-series-x-next-generation-backward-compatibility/) about their next generation backwards compatibility got me thinking about the benefits of the way Microsoft has presented it in the aforementioned article. For me it is definitely not a system seller, as for me, it's all about the games. But in my opinion backwards compatibility can be useful to games as well, by being able to preserve your older games.

 

Over the years I've collected a lot of games across different systems and generations. I always keep my older consoles and most of the games. Despite owning a vast collection and an ever increasing backlog, I still find joy in starting up some older games from time to time. I've encountered practical issues with playing older games, like no support for the older consoles/handhelds, broken or worn consoles/handhelds or simply not having enough room or power outlets to fit all of your consoles in round your tv. I do not like having to be reliant on second hand consoles and often, they are overpriced or face the same problems as the ones you have owned before. It is not really a time proof way of preserving, even not if you are really careful with your stuff.

 

Preserving legacies sounds like the way to go forward for all studios. The recent flooding of remasters and re-releases is not the way to go forward for me, since a lot of them do not deliver a significant increase of quality. Some tend to run even worse (Mafia II as a recent example) compared to the original game up to the point you rather would be able to play to older version. Besides, I prefer buying the game once and being able to play it on future consoles, but as long as the majority of consumers continues buying all the remasters it's a profitable way for publishers, so they will push on with it.

In the article Microsoft states that all older games are playable in their original form. The company also presents a platform based option to upscale older games to 'newer standards'. I'm not a IT pro in any sense, but I'm curious to see how it would deal with older codings not designed for the newer techniques. Right now I also can't see how Microsoft can pull off upscales and/or better performance for so many games, while publishers and studios need to invest time and resources (not the same amounts as a full development, but still some money) into one or two games. They even hint at the 'complex mix of technical and licensing challenges' themselves. In any case it would be best if you get the option to either enable or disable the automatic upscaling to eliminate the risk of a bad outcome of the automatic process. 

 

After reading the article and especially the last paragraph it sounds like an empty promise to me and certainly not like something available at the launch date of the Series X. How do you hope Sony is taking care of preserving our legacies in the future? 

[AJ_-_808]

I'm actually ok with the "flood of remasters"

 

With the 4000+ ps4 games out there. Plus how ever many ps3 games and whatever is available on psnow, exactly how often are you replaying the same game that it becomes an issue?

 

Wouldnt your trophy list act as your legacy, so to speak?

[TurtlePM]

16 minutes ago, AJ_-_808 said:

I'm actually ok with the "flood of remasters"

 

With the 4000+ ps4 games out there. Plus how ever many ps3 games and whatever is available on psnow, exactly how often are you replaying the same game that it becomes an issue?

 

Wouldnt your trophy list act as your legacy, so to speak?

 

PS Now is not an answer. Most games they provide don't include DLC and you can't even buy/install them. They don't even launch new PS3 games in almost a year. I can't download them and my internet is not fast enough to play them without lag.

I would like to see retrocompatibility to kill my backlog, even though I would like to replay some games like Ratchet and Clank Trilogy and Prince of Persia, which are not included on PSNow.

 

The good thing about Xbox is that you are upgrading your console like a PC. You don't need another Xbox or PC to play older games, you just upgrade your console to play new games, but never taking away the possibility to play your older games. 

[DaivRules]

33 minutes ago, Everz00 said:

How do you hope Sony is taking care of preserving our legacies in the future? 

 

I kinda don't. I want them to put out the best console they can put out when they do. When they design their next console, I want that console to be the best IT can be, without constraining itself to limitations for the previous console.

 

Frankly "preserving our legacies" coming from Microsoft is laughable. Microsoft hampered Windows for decades with it's legacy crap holding back each new version. Maybe they did learn, but it really seems like it's just a marketing term they're using right now because it's their unique selling point. Nintendo isn't really doing the backward compatibility thing, Sony is going to support all PS4 titles, some with enhanced performance, but not older than that.

 

[AJ_-_808]

2 hours ago, TurtlePM said:

 

PS Now is not an answer. Most games they provide don't include DLC and you can't even buy/install them. They don't even launch new PS3 games in almost a year. I can't download them and my internet is not fast enough to play them without lag.

I would like to see retrocompatibility to kill my backlog, even though I would like to replay some games like Ratchet and Clank Trilogy and Prince of Persia, which are not included on PSNow.

 

I'll concede that point - maybe an improved PSNow would work?

 

While I'm not against backwards compatibility, im.not really clamoring for it either.  A good chunk of my previous gen collection is already available as port/remaster/remake, with still more being announced on a semi regular basis.

 

My opinion - there's plenty else to play while waiting for a specific remaster, and the once-in-a-while nostalgia itch can usually be covered by emulator (ps1/ps2) or ps3/psnow 

 

I'm not sure there's enough of a demand for full backwards compatibility (vocal minority from here for example)for Sony to see it as worthwhile.  I think anyone playing previous gen on a regular basis will already have the old consoles/emulators in place already.

[nrs1nrs1]

As much as it would make me happy, I really just don't see Sony finding a real financial incentive to do so. I'm still happy grabbing my PS3 to play those games, but honestly most games from before that haven't aged well and I'd rather see upgraded versions of PS2 and PS1 games.

[majob]

Microsoft is first and foremost, throwing a line. They're not concerned with legacies, they're concerned with image and it's an image they've spent the last 4 years building up as a "gamer friendly" company after the Xbox One launch effectively blew up in their faces. This is about being able to point the finger at their competition and saying "look at what they're not doing that we are". They want oh so desperately to get that gaming monopoly  the same way they control the PC market The Series X is not 100 compatible with the Xbox family aside from the One so this talk of "legacy" already comes out half baked but backwards compatibility is the feature that's always the most asked for yet the least used. and they've made oodles of good press  talking up how much they "care" for it.

[TJ_Solo]

Quote

Preserving Legacies

 

You mean keeping as many people as possible locked into the Xbox ecosystem. 

As gens changed I freely sold and gave away my old games/consoles to make room for new consoles and new games. Preserving my gaming legacy was simply about me being able to remember that I plaved XYZ game not keeping XYZ game around forever.

You people need to stop letting Microsoft dictate the way you think.  It is all marketing to them

Stop being a sheep in sheep's clothing.

 

[majob]

22 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

You mean keeping as many people as possible locked into the Xbox ecosystem. 

As gens changed I freely sold and gave away my old games/consoles to make room for new consoles and new games. Preserving my gaming legacy was simply about me being able to remember that I plaved XYZ game not keeping XYZ game around forever.

You people need to stop letting Microsoft dictate the way you think.  It is all marketing to them

Stop being a sheep in sheep's clothing.

 

To be fair, people like myself enjoy being able to revisit an old game from time to time. I still break out my Sega Dreamcast every once in a while for example. But you're absolutely right that's it's all  marketing and hearing them talk about "legacies" when only a fraction of the 360 and Xbox library is backward's compatible and it's easy to smell the bull

[TurtlePM]

1 hour ago, AJ_-_808 said:

 

I'll concede that point - maybe an improved PSNow would work?

 

While I'm not against backwards compatibility, im.not really clamoring for it either.  A good chunk of my previous gen collection is already available as port/remaster/remake, with still more being announced on a semi regular basis.

 

My opinion - there's plenty else to play while waiting for a specific remaster, and the once-in-a-while nostalgia itch can usually be covered by emulator (ps1/ps2) or ps3/psnow 

 

I'm not sure there's enough of a demand for full backwards compatibility (vocal minority from here for example)for Sony to see it as worthwhile.  I think anyone playing previous gen on a regular basis will already have the old consoles/emulators in place already.

 

That's the thing: if you look at the PS4 catalog, most of them are remakes/remasters/ports of previous consoles.

 

Just a small list of games I bought on PS2/PS3 and they were re-released: The Last of Us, Uncharted Trilogy, Bioshock Collection, Kingdom Hearts (3 diffent editions), Zone of the Enders 2, Devil May Cry Trilogy, Far Cry 3, God of War III, Assassins Creed Ezio and III Remastered, Gravity Rush, Astérix and Obélix XXL2, La-Mulana 1&2... And recently: Mafia II and Saints Row 3.

 

And when you get a PSNow subscription, you get most of these games from PS3!!! Devil May Cry is the exact same game on PS4, but I can't download it because it's a PS3 game.

 

For me, this was the worst generation in terms of NEW GAMES. It was a "nostalgic" era with new mini consoles and remakes. But frankly, nobody can say that people don't care about "retrocompability" when these Ports and "Remasters" (Mafia 2 pile of shit) sold millions. 

 

 

[DaivRules]

5 minutes ago, TurtlePM said:

That's the thing: if you look at the PS4 catalog, most of them are remakes/remasters/ports of previous consoles.

2,623 titles for PS4 and you’re claiming most of them are Remakes/Remasters/Ports?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_4_games

[majob]

10 minutes ago, TurtlePM said:

 

For me, this was the worst generation in terms of NEW GAMES. It was a "nostalgic" era with new mini consoles and remakes. But frankly, nobody can say that people don't care about "retrocompability" when these Ports and "Remasters" (Mafia 2 pile of shit) sold millions. 

 

 

Many people forget that starting with the sixth generation, the amount of people whom play video worldwide effectively doubled as gaming became a mainstream hobby. Companies, in an era where game production costs have risen and risen while the price of games has stayed effectively flat, started to outsource old code to third parties as "remasters" because they were easy products to release to what were effectively new audiences. And considering the explosion of the indie scene I'd be hard pressed that this generation was anything but bad for "new games" when there's seemingly always some literal who out there releasing their latest creation.

Edited May 29, 2020 by majob

[BlackTorito]

Everything’s said here, Xbox is full of marketing, but if you can’t back that with something solid, then it will banish as fast as it takes Sony to release 2 states of play with Tsushima and Ellie, and 2 world wide known multiplayers on PS Plus to get back all the momentum Xbox could have got by “trash talking” them.

 

It’s really crazy all the things they can afford to experiment with, given all the money and power they have, “preserving legacies” its definitely something not important, very hard to achieve and make viable and not a selling point, so why waste the time and money, and sacrifice performance for a few nostalgia times you could get from time to time on a given span, AND, something that will only happen to the generation that experienced the old games, mostly.

 

You can always dust off your old consoles and play them, only a week ago I turned on my N64, and it still worked (but holy shit I did forget how the graphics were, they looked really bad).

[majob]

5 minutes ago, BlackTorito said:

It’s really crazy all the things they can afford to experiment with, given all the money and power they have, “preserving legacies” its definitely something not important, very hard to achieve and make viable and not a selling point, so why waste the time and money, and sacrifice performance for a few nostalgia times you could get from time to time on a given span, AND, something that will only happen to the generation that experienced the old games, mostly.

 

As I've mentioned earlier, it's all about cornering the market for Microsoft.. The Xbox was a money pit, the 360 rarely broke even, they've only just now started to turn a profit with the One and that's largely due to Gamepass and after getting a CEO that gave half a damn about the gaming division to mitigate failings in other divisions. Microsoft will gladly throw money at whatever edge they think they can buy for themselves if it means becoming the dominant player.

[Starcade_Legend]

I think somethings being missed here.

 

Microsoft is not making a play for ‘traditional’ backwards compatibility (which WOULD be strictly a sign of goodwill); they are bolstering their online services (GamePass/Xcloud) as well.

 

The technologies they are using to ‘enhance’ their Original Xbox and 360 titles seem amazing.  And as much as I do believe there will be some type of ‘backwards-compatible’-type feature on PS5 with legacy systems, I really don’t think they will go to the extent of sprucing up games from 2001 as Microsoft has.

 

They realize the goodwill and ‘feels’ of legacy titles are something a lot of us care about, if not...why bring this program back after officially announcing its shutdown last year?  It’s also a way to make their online services more attractive, to have a larger array of titles than its competitors.  Any way you slice it, this is a good thing for everyone involved.

 

SONY, don’t let me down next week!  ?

[majob]

5 minutes ago, Starcade_Legend said:

 if not...why bring this program back after officially announcing its shutdown last year? 

This is textbook marketing. Removing a product or service for a  period  only to "bring it back"

 

And Gamepass only ever has 100 titles at any given time, the bulk of which are just Microsoft first party games so the amount of unique offerings is actually much smaller. Even with complete Xbox one compatibility, the console doesn't have many of the titles that were made only available on the PS4 and Switch so it's debatable to claim they're coming out the gate with a larger library, especially when news on the ps5's own BC isn't concrete yet.

[sepheroithisgod]

I want to start off by saying many people really miss the point for a lot of remasters this gen.

 

It's to help newer gamers get their hands on classics.

 

Now I get it, if you're like me and keep up with gaming and all of the major releases, the ridiculous stream of remasters may seem overkill, but if you just got into gaming at some point this gen, you now have access to some really great games (and some really bad ports like Mafia 2).

 

In regard to the topic, it's very clear that Microsoft is trying to make its major selling point backwards compatibility. It's a great feature for sure, but no one buys a console for that (maybe they make the shift quicker because of it).

 

I do think that Sony should do more because it is really annoying not being able to just play the games I own on hardware that is fully capable.

 

I also think that PSNow is flawed since it does not include DLC. Let's be honest a lot of games today have 25-50% of the game as DLC. More does need to be done on this front more than anything else imo.

[TJ_Solo]

1 hour ago, Starcade_Legend said:

SONY, don’t let me down next week!  

 

They won't let you down.

They will show an hours worth of new PS5 games.

[Starcade_Legend]

59 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

They won't let you down.

They will show an hours worth of new PS5 games.

As much as I’m excited for that as well...I need my ‘dream’ of backwards compatibility with legacy titles to be a reality.  What a mic drop moment *IF* they do it right...?

2 hours ago, majob said:

This is textbook marketing. Removing a product or service for a  period  only to "bring it back"

 

And Gamepass only ever has 100 titles at any given time, the bulk of which are just Microsoft first party games so the amount of unique offerings is actually much smaller. Even with complete Xbox one compatibility, the console doesn't have many of the titles that were made only available on the PS4 and Switch so it's debatable to claim they're coming out the gate with a larger library, especially when news on the ps5's own BC isn't concrete yet.

Something tells me you didn’t see Microsoft’s latest reveal for backwards compatibility...?

[TJ_Solo]

Quote

As much as I’m excited for that as well...I need my ‘dream’ of backwards compatibility with legacy titles to be a reality.  What a mic drop moment *IF* they do it right...

 

"Need"

Sure.

"Do it right" 

Isn't everything good if done right? 

 

[Starcade_Legend]

44 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

"Need"

Sure.

"Do it right" 

Isn't everything good if done right? 

 

Depends on what you define as ‘right’, I guess...?

[Dry_Plumbus]

8 hours ago, sepheroithisgod said:

I also think that PSNow is flawed since it does not include DLC. Let's be honest a lot of games today have 25-50% of the game as DLC. More does need to be done on this front more than anything else imo.

 

No one cares about dlc except hardcore completionists/trophy hunters (very very small % of the pie). Lots of people buy things like season passes, but never even play those dlcs. I mean look at dlc trophy completion percentages. It's staggering.

 

Now i'm not saying PSNOW is a good product, it's not. But sony likely has little incentive to add those in, and im sure there are licensing restrictions at play as well.

 

Also I disagree that most games have 25-50% of the game as DLC unless you are referring to multiplayer shooters with map packs etc. I would instead argue that 90% of all DLC is not only insanely over priced, but often adds little significance to the base game for most games besides massively multiplayer games.

 

Maybe you can make the case for assassin creed DLC as it seems to be quite lengthy, but those games are already the biggest time sinks in the AAA marketplace.

 

Oh and as far as BC is concerned, it's all 100% marketing and hype. PS1/2/3 BC would never be a significant revenue contribution to Sony's bottom line, and it will never happen, stop asking for it, because it's just not worth Sony's time. PS4 BC is fine, as they have muddied the whole generation thing by having in between consoles now, so it kind of makes sense than PS4 and PS5 would have some overlap/BC.

 

But it's not a good selling point really. I am not going to drop $500 on a new console to play PS4 games. I Don't care if they load faster or have slightly better resolution. I want new games, new reasons to purchase a new console. I already own a PS4 Pro, and a PS3. And even going back to PS3 is painful on the eyes these days... games look so bad, I would rather just wait for a full remake then play some of these old AAA titles.

 

And people are tripping if they think Sony would rather spend development money on making old PS3 games look better for "free" or some kind of an update, VS selling you an entirely new sku for $59.99 or whatever.

 

Again, it's all just marketing mumbo jumbo. BC is a silly thing to get work up over. M$ only does it because they lost this gen and are desperate to make up for it this next gen.

 

Oh goodie I can play all FIVE xbox one exclusives they had the entire life span of the one x! Yay! Lol.

[FielVeredus]

In my opinion this give me confident in purchasing game on microsoft platform because doing so Microsoft seems to make sure that my DIGITAL purchase last and can be play forever (or until microsoft shutdown) 

Come to think of it, you bought says PS3 digital game, then service discontinue , you basically lost licensing (i guess) of older game you was purchasing on that platform forever which PS3 store seems not that far long until that happened..

 

This BC / FC thing should have in place to give user confident in digital future where their library build up but still can play and go with them beyond the generation.

 

Not everyone has space to cope up for old console and you all know it either can be broke or very hassle to plug in and out just to play it.

 

There are still many PS3 game I want to play and revisit (can see my profile, i still play til last year but for now i can't afford to do that anymore as my space now can't accommodate it so i have to leave my PS3 for good and really sad) I still want to play some old license game , physical exclusive that will never see the light of remaster and earn trophy from them.

 

While I still hope Sony would do PS3 BC as they can benefit more from downloading PS3 game from PS Now. and still sale back catalog while allowing user who already buy digital game using it forward. It is just consumer friendly feature and I am not sure why everyone would strongly (I mean hate with passion and naysayer to everyone express their love to BC) against it as PC already been the case.

 

I even willing to pay +$200 more for PS5 SKU that allow at least PS3 BC.

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by FielVeredus

[TJ_Solo]

8 hours ago, Starcade_Legend said:

Depends on what you define as ‘right’, I guess...

 

Well I don't use that saying because it isn't defined and a bit circular.

I don't know what is right or wrong in a subjective field. I know what I like and explain that.

[TurtlePM]

15 hours ago, DaivRules said:

2,623 titles for PS4 and you’re claiming most of them are Remakes/Remasters/Ports?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_4_games

 

Yes, you're right, considering all digital games (specially indies) and all crossbuys with PS3/PSVita, there are millions more games.

I'm a collector, I buy physical copies, not digital (unless there is no physical copy or that copy is from Limited Run Games or any other similar organization). Don't forget that some countries in Europe don't have many games like the rest of other countries in the world. I have to buy from UK most of my games. 

 

It's not like PS2 games, which had million more games produced, where companies made new games every time.