Gamers excited for new generation of consoles

“Thank God – no backwards compatibility. Now I can exchange all of my old games at Gamestop for a total of $25 in-store credit.”

This pretty much sums it up for me. I think it’s gonna be a long time before I bother to replace the game consoles I’m currently using.

  • At least the Playstation 4 will have backwards compatibility!

    You insert your PS 3 games, the console recognizes the game and it will be streamed via Gaikai (because the console lacks the necessary power or hardware to emulate a PS3).

    If the next Xbox will feature backwards compatibility is not yet known.

    The graphics won’t be marginally better, they will be much better. Not a Nintendo 64 to Xbox 1 step, but still visibly better.

    With a PC, you would have to pay 400-600$ every two years to have enough computing power to play the newest games in higher settings – with a console, you only have to pay this amount every 5+ years.

    And the nightmarish mess behind the tv has also to be sorted through when you want to exchange your AppleTV for a more recent model.

    But well, i guess the name of that page is giving the quality of their article away in advance.

    • Buckeyestar

      Has that been confirmed by Sony anywhere? I know they’ve said the PS4 won’t play PS3 games and have insinuated that streaming of PS3 games could happen, but I don’t recall them confirming that loading a PS3 disc would automatically allow you to stream that game. In fact, I got the impression that streaming PS3 games might not even be available on launch day.

      • No, they haven’t, but it’s the logical consequence.

        Even before they announced the console, i was absolutely sure that they bought Gaikai due to backwards compatibility. Streaming PS4 games would have a too bad picture quality but PS3 games would look okay. And they had to stream them, because unless they add the Cell and RSX processors to the PS4, there’s no way they would be able to emulate that hardware. (They “emulated” the PS2 on the PS3 hardware the same way – by building a PS2 into the PS3^^)

        So all that Gaikai stuff and Dave Perry on stage during the presentations means they want people to be able to play Playstation 3 games.

        The next logical step would be, to allow the people who already bought lots of PS3 games to play them without additional charge.

        Because nobody would accept a big “FUCK YOU!” from Sony and pay again to play the games they already own on disk and which they could also play by inserting them into the PS3 they already own.

        So i am very sure that a Playstation 4 will be able to verify a PS3 disk and then start playing the game – via streaming.

        • Or, this being the modern gaming business where no opportunity to charge the customer is overlooked, the logical conclusion may be you’ll be able to play PS3 games you already own when you pay a suitable fee to upgrade to the streaming version.

          Now I agree with you, it would make sense from the customer viewpoint to do this. But I think it’s a bit naive to assume this is what will happen. Look at Nintendo, they charged gamers an upgrade fee to move Virtual console titles from the Wii to Wii U! Why, from Sony’s POV, would they let you stream for free off a disk that can just be passed around or bought second hand when they can charge you to buy or rent access to the game?

          Actually, now that I think about it, Sony already have history here. They charged PSP users to have access to digital versions of games they already owned on UMD! As this was the only way you could access these games on Vita it got quite pricey at between £4 and £12 a title. Oh, and once you’d registered a disc to your account that was it, it was locked and you couldn’t re-register it. Still think they’re going to let PS3 games play for free while they’re paying for the server farm and bandwidth?

            1. Unfortunately, Nintendo has no idea how to run an online service and totally fucks up at every possible step in that domain 🙁

            2. I have no idea how you registered your UMDs to your PSN account, but i think it would be more difficult for Sony to argue that they have to charge people for allowing them to play streamed games.

            You can’t insert your UMD into your PS Vita, while you can insert your PS3 blurays into the bluray drive of the PS4.

            People have no idea how technology works and so you can’t really argue with them that the game is run on a server far away and that the server costs money. And then, people could also keep on using their PS3s, because unlike PSP/PS Classics titles run on a PS Vita, which will use the larger screen, it doesn’t matter if you play a PS3 game via PS3 or PS4, the game doesn’t look better on a PS4 (In fact, it will look slightly worse).

            I don’t believe that Sony will be able to persuade people to pay to play their PS3 games with worse picture quality than on the PS3 they already own.

            1. Another indicator that Sony won’t charge may be the fact that they don’t charge for playing online games on the PS3. While Microsoft charges for this “feature”, Sony doesn’t. If they tried to grab money whenever possible, they would have charged for online services.

            2. If they charge – i don’t think they’ll charge for each game, i would guess that they’ll just add the ability to play PS3 games (you already own, playing new games will of course require some kind of payment) to PSN Plus, which is already very cheap for the amount of free stuff you get.

        • Buckeyestar

          Sounds good, but it’s just wishful thinking at this point. They happily charged again for older PS1 and PS2 games as downloadable titles on PS3.

          • You can’t compare those two things.

            You can always emulate PS1 titles on the PS3, even now, because the PS3 has enough computing power to be able to do that.

            If you want to play a PS1 title, just insert it.

            They are charging for these titles in the case that you don’t already own them.

            If you want to play FFVII, you either have to hunt it down at the local flea market – or just buy it from Sony as a downloadable title.

            With PS2 titles, it’s quite similar – if you want to play them, just insert the disk into your OLD PS3 – because they still had the necessary components (the EmotionEngine processor of the PS2 was built into every PS3 at the beginning). In an effort to save costs, they got rid of these chips, because there were more PS3 titles and less people played old PS2 titles.

            Making people pay for PS2 titles now, is only because they never planned for the ability to verify PS2 disks on the PS3 and download them, because when the console was released, they had a totally different mechanism for backwards compatibility.

            With the PS4, they know from the beginning that there would be no chance that it would be able to run PS3 games, so they would have been able to implement disk verification from day 1 of developement.

    • Buckeyestar

      And in regards to the Apple TV bit, I don’t have to mess with anything. I upgraded to the current model from the previous model extremely easily. I just in unplugged the cables from the back of the old one and plugged the new one into the same cables. I didn’t even have to look behind the TV.

      • So how is that any different with a new console? Remove HDMI from the back of the old console, insert it at the back of the new console.

        Yeah, you’ll have to change the power cable, but is that really so difficult? And with the Playstation, Sony has an integrated power supply, to you’ll not even have to change some huge power brick with a proprietary plug like with the Xbox 360, but it’s very likely that you just have to remove two cables from the back of the PS3 – HDMI and power – and insert them at the back of the PS4.

    • lucascott

      Nightmare of upgrading my Apple TV?

      Bought a new one, unplugged the old one, plugged in the new one, five minutes max to punch in my network settings, setup my apple remote app etc.

      Where’s the nightmare?

  • Can’t wait to sign up to a two-year $2,000 contract for the iPhone 6 with its slightly faster processor and nicer screen/camera that I’ll mostly use for Gmail and Twitter. It comes out in September, right?

    • Oh, i remember waiting in line (at half past midnight) in mid-october for an iPhone^^ (and it was fun)

    • honix

      Excuse me, but what the hell does this have to do with the subject of this post? Thank you, asshat.

      • towaquon

        It has plenty to do with the post. Not everyone needs to buy the latest and greatest gizmo just because it’s new and shiny. That applies to videogames, phones, tables, PCs, cars, TVs, etc.

        Peter himself has said on several occasions that he no longer feels the need to buy a new iPhone every year just because Apple releases one. I can see where he’s coming from here – if you don’t need it, don’t buy it. Especially if you’re happy with what you’ve got.

      • James answered to the dorkly dorks, which stated that they would love to pay 400+ dollars for a console with only slightly better graphics they’ll only use for netflix and wait in line at midnight in november to buy it (the condensed version).

        People wait in September (and i waited in line in mid October, so very close to November) to pay lots of money for a new iPhone which some people also only use for lowly netflix-like tasks.

        Everything that is stated in the linked article can also be said about anything by Apple and while everything stated carries some truth – it is also terribly wrong, because it ignores all the benefit a new console offers.

    • Peter Cohen

      Given that I stopped using my iPhone last year, the irony of your post isn’t lost on me.

    • lucascott

      No one is forcing you to upgrade. If all you do is gmail and twitter then perhaps you shouldn’t

    • jacksonsquire

      I’m with James here. I’ve had a total of two iPhones since the original came out, and there’s no way in hell I’d stand in line for an iPhone. It’s a phone I can check my email and twitter on and play shit games on when I get bored on the train and don’t have a 3DS on me (which isn’t that frequent). You’d think because of the larger screen there would be some quality games for the iPad, but that hasn’t happened yet. It’s completely hypocritical for people to complain about buying a new console when they’ll happily buy the new shiny Apple product every year and even stand in long lines like idiots for it.

      Consoles come around every 6 years and are usually a huge leap in capability from the previous one. They’ve all cost anywhere between $300-$400 in today’s US dollars (adjusted for inflation). So, that’s around $400 every 6 years when people pay $400 every year, complain about AT&T or Verizon’s (or some other carrier elsewhere) charging them to get out of their 2 year contract, and then happily throw $2000 over that year in the toilet for the service just for something that’s only marginally better than the previous product.

      Truth be told people buy consoles for the games, and the quoted person was complaining about lack of backwards compatibility in the PlayStation 4. Since when is Sony the entire console gaming market? The Wii U is backwards compatible with the Wii and even can use the Wii remotes in new games. We don’t know for sure what Microsoft is going to do yet. There’s only rumors.

      Sony mentioned a few years ago they made a mistake using so many custom parts on the PS3 because it drove up the cost so much, so it was obvious a few years ago the PS4 would not be backwards compatible. It’s just simply a complete and necessary change.

      Complaining about lack of backwards compatibility with a 6 year old system is douchebaggery in of itself because never has it been a given. It’s only a recent thing that started with the PlayStation 2, and it’s only if the hardware permitted it. Let’s bring this back to the realm of Apple. Do you expect your 6 year old Mac apps to work on new Macs? It’s the same thing.

      I, for one, keep my older consoles. I have every console I’ve ever owned back to the Atari 2600. I will plug them up and play old games when I feel like it until emulation catches up. Sometimes I plug them up after that for nostalgia’s sake. I know plenty of people who do this. It’s not like the console quits working after the new one comes out.

    • gjgustav

      If that’s all use it for, then you sort of have a point. But this “adding the contract service into the price” trick is stupid, unless you are giving up on smartphones altogether. You’re going to have to pay for service no matter which smart phone you are using.

  • John David

    Ditto! I have no desire for any of them. Happy with what I have. Frankly, the iPad has become my go to platform for gaming & when it becomes possible to play games from my Apple TV which I’m pretty sure will be added to it’s capabilities, I don’t see myself replacing my consoles when they do stop working.

    • lucascott

      Same here. Well for most things. I still have my original Nintendo for a few older games that still aren’t on the iPad.

  • Mark Biswas

    I don’t plan on buying one of the new consoles, but this is just stupid. The current ones are 2005 technology; it’s time for them to go. They are holding everything, including PC gaming, back.

    The reason that many of these games don’t look that much better is that many of them will work on current gen, and it takes time for developers to utilize the full potential of a system (just look at Oblivion on the 360.)

    Maybe the streaming thing will work out for Sony, but it’s not surprising that backwards compatibility is out. The cell processor had to go to make it more developer friendly. Sony made the right decision.

  • Squozen

    I can’t wait for new consoles. The current generation are so memory-starved that they’re holding developers back.