PS4 Xbox 720

I would consider it, atleast more thank 100k, plus if ps4 is as good as its supposed to be and friendly to indies and if the indie store or marketplace looks like a good place to sell my game I would. Of course I would have to do a little fund raising but it could be promising

 

What are you talking about

 

Given the following choices:

1. Pay less for a PS4 without BC.
2. Pay more for a PS4 with BC.

Most would choose 1. Since if you have PS3 games, you normally have a PS3 that can play them. I'm sure there are some people who don't have a PS3 and would like the opportunity to buy a PS4 and get a two-for-one deal to play old game, but they are surely in the minority, and could just purchase a used PS3 anyway. Why should everyone who already has a PS3 pay more to do what they already can do?

 

Actually they took away the GC controller ports last year.
So the newer ones you can't really play any GC games on.

 

This was talked about on page 5.

 

Theirs no reason Sony can't do both . Give consumers the option .
I'd rather pay an extra 100$ for a system that lets me play the hunderds of released PS3 games , and PS4 games , then get a system that just plays PS4 games.

Anyway, time will tell .

 

There is a reason, actually: past trends showing that the production costs of such a divide would be nothing but a drain on profits given how few people would actually buy them.

 

So basically it's too early to say.

 

This is only really an issue for some consoles, not enough to say past trends IMO.

 

There's actually loads of past trends to draw from including things like console hardware retention rates and data collected through the lifespan of consoles. the only time backwards compatibility makes sense is in the context of handhelds, and that's because carrying two handhelds around with you is a vastly different proposition than two consoles in your livingroom.

 

What about when an older console dies? Then they can sell you your favorite games again as downloads, that IMO is why they do it not due to cost.

 

Except no? In that situation most people will likely just:

1. Sell their old games because you'd be surprised at how infrequently older games are played. This can be evidenced by looking at things such as most recently played games on your friends lists and Steam.
2. Just buy a used version of their old console on the cheap.

One of the reasons the used games market has such a crazy price grade is because, as the months go on, even new games tend to be less played. I'm talking games that came out 6 months ago. This isn't just supported by evidence that console manufactures get directly from players from use statistics, but the pricing data that comes from retailers. The only outlier in the used game pricing scheme is Nintendo, due to the fact that they typically take 3 or 4 years to even drop their standard retail prices.

 

Isn't your argument flawed as console makers then go to so much effort to sell the games again, if no one wanted old games then why does Nintendo have virtual console games? Why is Sony going to stream PS3 games? People do wan't the old games, especially in generation 8.

 

Because these are low-cost alternatives to fully supporting a backwards compatibility framework. Do you know what the Virtual Console is? It's a tiny section of a storefront that deals in selling emulated games. Not only that, but they're excessively curated markets. Not every game is on the virtual console and odds are that even the streamed PS3 games will not equal the whole library, but the top... prooobably 5 selling games of each year of the console's release.

 

I don't get this.... the argument is rather absurd. Backwards compatibility IS a feature that some like. It's a valid desire for it to be there, the first "next gen" console out offers it and not offering it out of the gate in new consoles is giving your competitor an advantage.

Does this means Sony HAS to offer backward compatibility? Not really.
Will it hurt them? A bit.
Too much? Nah.
Are people that rant about the lack of backward compatibility stupid? Definitively not.

Honestly, unless you are the one selling the console, there is no reason to dispute the validity of desiring that feature.

Just to add my grain of salt to this: My living room is already a fire hazard. I am unlikely to buy a new console if I cannot replace the old one with it, at least not for years until the new console's library is large enough to justify it. Lack of backwards compatibility may not stop me from buying a console eventually, but it WILL delay my consideration for the thing for at least 2 years.

 

Plus great PS3 games are still coming out . Kingdom hearts remix is coming this fall .
If Joe consumer wants a PS4 and he likes Kingdom hearts, it has added value if it plays Kingdom hearts .

Sony can do something like give you a streaming pass for games it can read( not play, just check the disk) along with Playstation Plus . That would push my PS4 buy from a high maybe to a heck yes. Also in the back of my mind I think sony isn't going to fund as many games this gen since their broke (alot of their studios are gone , look at Zipper )

 

On the other side of the coin, adding proper backwards compatibility may require them to technically have a PS3 inside the PS4, increasing costs drastically.

Their "streaming" thing may work IF they will use my game disks as a validation key so I can just insert the disk and not be forced to "re-license" the thing again. In a way I think they are forced to drop backwards compatibility if they are to get rid of that frankenchip programmers used to hate. I ponder what will happen with Microsoft... PowerPC chips are also not exactly a developed tech anymore... they may be forced to return to Intel compatible chips. Good side of that is they may be able to do easy XBox1 backwards compatibility. Bad side is not having XBox 360 backwards compatibility.

Nintendo had it a bit easy the last 3 gens because they have not drastic architecture departures. Their current machine is just an evolution that can keep running old games at a slowed down mode.

 

I can understand them not including backwards compatibility. As Starsman says, it could increase costs significantly. Considering the massive difference in architectures between the two consoles, I'd say that's pretty likely. Even the one version of the PS3 with decent backwards compatibility achieved it by including PS2 hardware at a significant cost, and that's one of the first things they removed when lowering the cost of the console.

Add to that the fact that if people have PS3 games they want to keep playing then chances are that they already have a PS3 to play them on. Nobody's going to argue that it wouldn't be more convenient to play them on the same box, but is the convenience worth the cost? I've no doubt that for some people it would be, but as a general rule?

To me, the biggest "loss" here is for people who don't already have a PS3 who'd like to play some PS3 games, but would rather buy the new console instead. For those people backwards compatibility would be especially awesome, because to them it's not a convenience, it's an enabler.

 

xbox 720 licence is supposed to be only $60

 

Who said that?

 

I am extremely disappointed that the financial details that matter most to indie devs have not been mentioned at all for publishing on the consoles. Reading articles and comments from the past 6 months on how Sony may make Unity builds available leads me to believe that it will still be ridiculously priced and out of reach for most, which I do not think bodes well in this day in age with the likes of Steam, mobile , humble bundle, and the ease of self publishing on PC in general.

 

It's free on Microsoft if you're accepted as an indie dev and Sony will likely follow suit.

 

I got the ps4 and haven't been impressed with it so far

 

Why not? It is lightweight, small, has no power brick, minimal noise while playing games, free games every month, you dont need a subscription to use Netflix, stronger GPU, touchpad on the controller, has amazing games coming up, and it supports Indies. What more can you ask for? The Xbox one is the complete opposite. Also, take a look at this failure: http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/22/xbox-one-early-adopters-reporting-hardware-problems

 

You registered just to post this.