The point is, if you owned the VHS version did you get the DVD's for free as you bought them on a different format? The answer is no, you had to buy the DVD's regardless. If you want them in HD you would have to buy Blu Ray or digital, do you get that free as you own the DVD and VHS? No, you don't.

I hope that cleares up your issue

@Ziggurcat

"ignore the medium. it's an analogy directed at those who think..."

How can we ignore the medium when the analogy is just so damn stupid? No one here would even consider or expect getting a FREE digital or upgraded copy of a movie just because they had it on VHS.

Once again lets all ignore the real complaints people have and that is that emulation for PS2 games on PS4 works and that Sony COULD allow for the games they are offering and selling to also be played from the disc if that user owns it.

But instead this extremely horrible analogy that makes no sense is being passed from defender to defender like a virus.

It's hilarious that we should ignore that analogy but except or consider that everyone who has PS2 games STILL has a PS2 to play them on.

"...but that's not what Sony has implemented."

AND THAT IS THE COMPLAINT!
Sony should have implemented this.

Well said Gansta Red,

On point and totally logical of what me and many PS4 gamers were upset and complaining about regarding this emulation attempt by Sony.

Don't know why people don't want policy that benefits the install base and themselves included but constantly defending anti-consumer practice and willing to pay more to protect a Brand at all cost for whatever reason. Makes no sense.

@gangsta:

can you elaborate on how the analogy is "stupid"? keep in mind that it *only* addresses those who feel as though they are entitled to getting the PS4 version of the PS2 titles for free, not those who just want to be able to play their original, old PS2 games/downloaded PS2 classic from their PS3 without the enhancements... and i think the analogy is only "stupid" if you (i'm not saying you, personally... i mean "you" in the general sense) keep trying to argue that the analogy is implying that people should be allowed to play their VHS tapes in their blu-ray players.

'"...but that's not what Sony has implemented."

AND THAT IS THE COMPLAINT!
Sony should have implemented this.'

and i agree. they should have.

@Ziggurcat

"keep in mind that it *only* addresses those who feel as though they are entitled to getting the PS4 version of the PS2 titles for free,"

Who are these people? I haven't read one person who expects this. All I am reading are people wanting to play their old games on their new system. No one is expecting trophies or the graphics to be updated significantly when playing their old games (even though it should be upscaled, something the PS4 would have no problem doing). This is the issue, some on here are addressing a problem that no one is actually talking about.

The analogy is stupid because people are talking about an old outdated format and expecting to get a new one only because they still own it. Again, it's a made up argument from defenders that the majority of people complaining are not even suggesting Sony do.

The analogy is horrible and imo it is only taking the focus off of the real problem and discussion.

@Gangsta

Sony CAN NOT simply allow them to play because they want to. At least not for 3rd party content

Again, licensing.

I have a comment at 8.3.4 which gives specifics with links to actual publisher software license agreements which Sony made themselves preventing them from being able to distribute software in such a manner. I even quote the relevant part of the license agreement to make it easier on those who don't care to do educate themselves. I even give links DVD licensing which is something needed so DVD's can play on BR players for the sake of those thinking it's just a natural thing, instead of something involving money.

What Sony COULD DO is leave it up to the publisher like MS did. This would likely involve the publisher signing a new license agreement, and for all we know, such a thing is in the works. It may not be as well, and that topic is worthy of discussion.

The analogy isn't stupid. It's not completely applicable though. The medium is rather moot to the whole conversation other than being a technicality of if it would be possible. However, possible does not denote mandate.

I agree, however, Sony should work out something that should enable publishers to provide it, and it would be great if they did so for their own published titles.

However, don't pretend that a lot of the people in these discussions aren't upset over the wrong things, and approaching the issue in a way which isn't constructive. You've come around to looking at it more about what Sony should try to provide an outlet for, but many others still play the "Sony is greedy" card.

You ask who are these people? Well DragonKnight wrote a rather extensive blog with followup comments implying just that, and many were agreeing with him. I feel in some ways, the implication that just because the formats are similar it should be allowed is also a way of saying that they should get it just because, because they rarely decide to take the approach of "it would be great if Sony did offer a way to do it", and instead use it as a spring board to launch a tirade against Sony and their greedy ways.

@Rainslacker

"Again, licensing."

You keep going on about licensing and yet again you are missing what I and others are suggesting.

To allow gamers to play the games that have already been approved to play by the publishers or devs on the PS4. This can and should be done by Sony for their users.

"However, don't pretend that a lot of the people in these discussions aren't upset over the wrong things,"

So instead lets just argue against these pretend assumptions and make wide brushing analogies that make no sense or is relevant to the topic and maybe it will imply to some people who we think are upset over the wrong thing? Hmmmm....

You and some others are taking a few comments you may have read and implying them to everyone who has a legitimate gripe or a valid disappointment.

There have been more than enough people in this very article who have stated what I suggested Sony do. I haven't read anyone here who is expecting a FREE copy of a game only because they own the original and yet this topic keeps being brought up.

"Well DragonKnight wrote a rather..."

From what I remember DragonKnight's blog never stated that Sony should give you a free updated copy of the game with all the bells and whistles. And even if it did or if you read ONE or TWO people state that they are "entitled" to a free copy, doesn't justify how completely wrong this insane analogy is. And more importantly DK isn't even in this article saying what you think he said.

"...and instead use it as a spring board to launch a tirade against Sony and their greedy ways."

So basically what it comes down to is you don't want to see anyone bad mouthing or putting your favorite company in a bad light. Sorry if people aren't writing their frustrations in a more eloquent way to make Sony not look like the bad guy here.

People want a way to play these games on their PS4 without having to pay for them all over again. How could anyone not get behind this and want the same thing?

Pretty sure I agreed Sony should find a suitable solution

Lets assume just what you propose, because this very comment section has those comments included. You are saying that they don't exist, or aren't common, yet they seem pretty prevalent to me...as I keep addressing this issue, while people keep ignoring certain aspects of it.

What I'd prefer is people stay on point, and discuss what is possible, and then focus on ways that Sony should offer it, and the feasibility of such actions through the use of educated thought and reasoning. Maybe I should change my approach to address the points that I feel are actually relevant.

I have suggested that Sony should do something more along the lines of MS, but when I mention that the PS2 classics selection isn't robust for what's available, I get disagrees...does this mean that the selection is robust, or that people don't care to address whether the feature would even make a difference so ignore the argument?

I don't know, because people don't reply to my arguments, and the one's that do try to make it into something else. The only other way to really make it work would be to allow it across the board, directly from disc(or ripped to HD) and that isn't feasible due to license agreements.

Publisher approval may allow it, but are they going to approve a method of playing their games where there is no revenue stream? This is why I feel my license argument is quite valid, and it shouldn't be ignored because it comes down to what can Sony actually do which make sense for all parties involved?

I bring up Dragon's blog because you asked who was taking that approach. I merely offered an example. What he left ambiguous he made clear in follow up comments, and what he didn't clear up was made obvious by the rampant hate train in that blog.

I don't care if people bad mouth Sony, but if they're going to do so, I want them to at least do so in a way that makes sense, and for what they are deserving. Bad mouthing them because they don't simply allow emulation across the board is just wrong...and there are people in this thread doing just that.

Why aren't people writing their frustrations in more eloquent ways? Wouldn't that help to justify their argument over some of the more rampant entitlement going on? It's kind of hard to address an issue when people don't approach it in a reasonable fashion, and instead hide behind the disagree button, or worse, ignore the arguments which actually try to bring in some higher level of understanding of all the factors at play.

"People want a way to play these games on their PS4..."

I understand that, and I would like to as well. I can get behind that, just not some of the attitudes used to justify that want...such as it's expected, or because people feel they deserve it.

I respect that you are trying to go through the middle ground approach now. Despite our prior arguments on this subject, I feel at least you are not taking the entitlement approach. I think you and I would actually agree on most of the major points of what is possible, and what would be great if Sony provided. So much so, that a personal discussion about it would be rather boring.

I don't apply some of the thought processes to everyone here, nor was my reply meant to call you out on your comment. I didn't mean to dismiss your comment, and felt I actually addressed the parts I wanted to. While my tone often seems confrontational, all I really want is the discussion to go in a way that is more constructive.

Anyhow, out of bubbles, so until the next article I guess. I'll PM if you care to continue the discussion.

@Luke this isn't a direct reply to you, but I seem to get disagrees on this matter a lot. So time to throw in some facts.

Well, here's an overview of Phillip's licensing agreement for CD's.

http://www.ip.philips.com/d...

Here's a draft of a license agreement for DVD's...not the mention of licensing books? Books are different formats that can be recorded onto a DVD optical disc, and this license allows for the display and playback of certain licenses when the manufactuer pays for the license

http://www.dvdfllc.co.jp/pd...

Here's a copy of Sony's PS1 license agreement for games published on the PS1. It has confidential info ommited, but note that it specifially states PlayStation console...in this case, meansing PS1

http://corporate.findlaw.co...

Can someone who disagrees tell me where it states those games can be released on PS2, PS3, PS4 or any other device other than PS1 at Sony's discretion? No you can't.

Here's the one for PS2. Note it's an entirely different license?

http://corporate.findlaw.co...

Here's the relevant portion at 4.3

"[PUBLISHER RETAINS ALL RIGHTS, TITLE AND INTERESTS IN AND TO THE PRODUCT SOFTWARE][emphasis added], and the Product Proposals and Product Information related thereto, including without limitation Publisher Intellectual Property Rights therein, as well as Publisher rights in any source code and other underlying material such as artwork and music related thereto and any names used as titles for Licensed Products and other trademarks used by Publisher. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to restrict the right of Publisher to develop, distribute or transmit products incorporating the Product Software and such underlying material (separate and apart from the Sony Materials) [FOR ANY HARDWARE PLATFORM OR SERVICE OTHER THAN THE SYSTEM[PS2][emphasis added]..."

What this means is that Sony has no right to distribute other publisher's PS2 games on the PS4 through use of the emulator. Simple and done.

Become educated. It took less than a minute to find all three things on Google, and it only took a couple minutes to find the appropriate section in the PS2 software licensing agreement. Nowhere does it stipulate that the games should be allowed to play on future or other consoles.

This doesn't mean that Sony can't work on a way to make it happen much like MS did, but as long as people continue on with this divine right attitude and making up false equivalences because they don't understand licensing, the discussion can't be held in the way it needs to be.

@thisgamer503

BTW I am not disagreeing with you.

It would be very simple for Sony to make their PS2 emulator read in a PS2 image from PS2 media however the very act of reading that image can be constituted as piracy so Sony would have to get all developers and distributors of all PS2 games to agree to this otherwise they could face quite expensive litigation action and possible criminal prosecution.

Having backwards compatibility such as in the case of the PS2 and the early PS3's for PS2 games and all PS3's for PS1 games is different to what would be effectively ripping copyright media. Even if the emulator is set-up to only play the PS2 game from disk it could still be risky from a legal perspective.

What would be interesting is how Microsoft is actually doing emulation since they could find themselves in a legal minefield as well.

What is it with people and trophies. You would rather have a copy you have to pay for so that you can unlock some virtual badges over being able to play your current game library at no extra cost? Yes emulators can produce better visuals than the game being played on its native platform.

I also don't understand how reading a disc from a previous platform could be considered piracy. If they wanted to play it safe they could just ask permission from the publisher.