"They would probably sell more though if PS4 had backwards compatibility"
I dont know if they would, because people would be complaining about the PS4's price tag just like they did with the PS3. People complained so much Sony decided to do something about it, and they did. They removed the PS2 chips from the PS3 so they could bring down the price of the PS3, thats when we got the 40gb model.
GDDR6_2014:
Yeah but you are talking about the same platform. The PS3 and ps4 is not the same platform. In fact the only thing that the 2 consoles have in common is that they both have a Blu-ray drive. Even their OS is completely different.
"PS3 wasn't $600 because of BC"
Thats not 100% accurate. It obviously cost money to have additional physical chips inside a console to accommodate backwards compatibility.
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
The question is. Do we want a 500 or 600$ PS4?? No we dont. Thats why there is no BC in the PS4. Sony wanted a more affordable price tag this time around. I for one, cant blame them.
@xXBlondieVanHarlowXx:
Yeah I know what you mean. Home is something basically online only which makes it so tricky to get it streamlined.
Personally I really dont care. I just want them to focus on getting home ready for the PS4.
What momentum? They are in last place this gen. And they are scratching their heads trying to figure out why the PS4 is out pre ordering the xbox1 even on its home turf the U.S
@Belking:
Why is it that I cant find anyone to explain to me how this "cloud" works if you are not connected to the internet? Looks like you keep falling for microsoft's typical misconceptions and lies. Either microsoft is gonna have a ton of unplayable games for some people, or they require your console to stay connected to the internet in order to play games. Guess which answer im going with? Those 300,000 servers by the way, are only virtual servers, nothing ...
Yeah a next gen Tenchu would be awesome. :)
Yep. A remake of the original Metal Gear game when Solid Snake was just a rookie in his early 20s. :)
Your comment deserves 1000 agrees. :)
@PSNintyGamer:
"The Wii kicked the ass of every one who thought it would fail."
Why would anyone think that a 250$ console aimed at the casuals would fail against a 400$ console and a 600$ console aimed at the core??
@Ksar:
Yeah you are right. And that winner vs. the 360 was the PS3. The PS3 simply sold more units in a shorter amount of time. Thats something that cant be debated.
@Qrphe:
Would you be able to do it without needing to stream it from a pc??
@starchild:
Its not exactly the same though, because at least the Vita has its own library of games making it even more useful.
Personally I just dont see the point for this thing. Your PC has to have relatively powerful Nvidia hardware in order for this thing to work. Why would pc gamers want to stream their games on a 5 inch lower res screen? When they probably have a high res monitor. Bottom line, this thing should have been its own independent device.
@bjmartynhak: Its about time I actually find a gamer thats honest about this. Im not saying there is no difference between 30 and 60 fps. But a lot of people cant tell the difference.
I agree with "CRAIG667". I want both, just like I've been getting with my PS3 this gen.
Who knows who lost more money this gen. Lets not forget about the 360's 50% failure rate. On top of already losing one Billion dollars when they decided up the RAM in the 360 at the last minute. Microsoft may made money from xbl true. But dont forget, Sony also makes money from psn as well as ps home.
Now come on guys. You guys all know that microsoft is eventually gonna introduce a kinectless sku. Remember, this is the same company that have no problem selling you a 360 with hardly no HDD at all.