This so much. People talk so much now about how important BC is and how they'd pay a premium for one PlayStation system that could play all their old discs, but when they were offered that exact thing in 2006, they bashed Sony and bought a 360. Funny how BC is not that big of a deal when Sony is pushing it (and offering a universal solution), and when they drop it to cut costs and MS starts pushing it, all the sudden it is the most important consumer-focused move any company can make. <...
If you ignore the media misrepresentations about the "almost 100 games" thing and look at what was actually said, it sounds a lot more like BC is the standard, but they wanted to cover themselves for the scenario when Atelier x One Piece Pirate: Explorers 3 has random framerate drops in the second half of the game, or a cutscene freezes sometimes in the PS4 remaster of Resident Evil 6. Like basically it is going to work, but there will inevitably be unexpected kinks here and there, ...
Yeah, they really should, especially because it got so misrepresented in the media by the whole "100 games" thing. Honestly, it would have been better if they had just said BC is a part of the console, and if we run into hiccups with certain specific games, we'll try to iron those out. Almost every instance of BC has some weird kinks with a few specific games (including 360 games on Xbox One), so that would not have been a huge surprise.
Remember when Sony launched a console that could play every PlayStation game that had ever been released (minus PSP), and everyone's reaction was "hey bros, let's play Gears of War and Dead Rising"? Because I'm sure they remember.
Oh we need cross play or we'll run out of people to play against online! It preserves old games!
It's telling about the state of Western RPGs that this article, like so many, is comparing a 2011 game with a 2015 game. And that the games aren't even in the same perspective (yes I know Skyrim can be played in third person, but people primarily play first person).
@Gahl1k
The temperature of the sun is higher than the temperature of Earth.
Do you accept that statement as a well known, verifiable fact, or do you need "data, statistics, or at least some kind of legitimate survey with a large sampling pool" to prove it to you?
@Atticus_finch
Thanks for agreeing with me, glad someone else isn't afraid the Sony police are going to arrest them for not being a big enough ...
Nope. PSN download speeds are far slower than my ISP's speed, and even compared to what PSN registers in an internet speed test. I'm not sure why people feel the need to dispute something they know to be true (Sony isn't paying attention guys, they aren't going to give you a special bonus for being the biggest fan). I've never understood the idea that we should pretend there are no problems on our favorite platform. I want to point them out, so it can get even better.
Wow, I didn't know that stating a well known, verifiable fact would get such hate, lol.
PS4 download speeds are already absurdly slow compared to Steam.
@shiva1 I respect that, lol.
@Charal I never said it was the only selling point. If PlayStation wasn't superior to all competition in a number of other ways, I wouldn't even be interested. The point is that it matters significantly. I bought PS3 at launch, and although it was technically more powerful, it was so complicated for devs that PS3 versions of multiplats were worse for several years (Burnout Paradise being the first notable title I remember being superior ...
Lol I'm getting downvoted, but you can't just build the less powerful console with a far less complete backwards compatibility solution (which to be fair is being misrepresented, they never said only 100 games, they said most games and had tested the 100 most popular as a benchmark) and expect to charge the same amount of money as the competition. I mean, yes, Sony will always have the best new games and a superior controller, but the price has to be right based on the machine itself....
Ugh. As someone who has bought every piece of PlayStation hardware, PS5 really needs to be at least $100 cheaper than XSX to make any sense at all. Which, to be fair, may end up being the case, because rumors suggest that XSX is basically going to be the "pro" version of the Xbox and there is going to be another cheaper version (which inevitably will be the primary version of the console if it exists). If there's a $400-$450 version of the Xbox, they can probably get away with $...
This will be fine as long as Sony prices the PS5 appropriately.
Imagine making your experience worse (or saying you are going to do so), just to win credibility points online.
False. It outsold the original Xbox. People have crazy expectations for MS based on the 360, which was only able to sell so well because Sony repeatedly shot itself in the foot by delaying PS3 a year and then launching at $600, mistakes it never completely recovered from in the U.S. Without Sony actively sabotaging themselves, 50m for Xbox is quite respectable, especially since they don't have the global reach Sony does.
I'm glad the arguments against digital on here have gotten so stupid that people are taking my comment seriously.
Hey, I'd much rather buy a physical copy for 20 so I can get 10 out of it later. This digital copy will be worthless.
It's insane to think that Sony was just clueless as to what they had with Socom. If they had been more forward-thinking with cultivating a first party brand (like they ultimately did later in the PS3 era), Socom could still be one of the major multiplayer titles today.
Sigh. If only a subset of people wasn't holding all of us back by refusing to buy digital.