Support NeoGAF

[IbizaPocholo]

https://gamingbolt.com/both-ps5-and...ly-be-backwards-compatible-says-hellpoint-dev

According to Marc-André Jutras, a veteran of Activision and Ubisoft, and currently working with Cradle Games on the upcoming science fiction RPG Hellpoint, it is likely to happen—and he does hope it will be all encompassing out of the box, rather than be a limited whitelist.

“The PlayStation I think will do it. I know, was it the Xbox 360 where they had a backward compatibility list with the original Xbox? They had to approve the game title by title? I think that was weird, and I hope it won’t be like that,” he said, in an exclusive interview with GamingBolt. “I prefer to have an emulator that will run all the games a console has, maybe with small bugs and glitches, instead of saying I have 50 games in my library and I can only play four of them because the others aren’t approved yet.“

He said that he much preferred the Nintendo approach with the Wii U, where every Wii game was playable off the bat, and that backward compatibility also ends up being beneficial for console manufacturers—it means their console isn’t starting from zero as far as game library goes, and it acts as a form of ecosystem lock in for them.

“I don’t like it with the Switch that it’s not backward compatible, but when they came out with the Wii U, hey every game on the Wii worked. That should be the way to do it,” he said. “Because let’s say you come up with a new console, your user base at this point is zero, and the number of games you have for your console is also zero. So you need developers to make games, and you need people to buy the console. And that’s a chicken and egg kind of issue. Will developers jump on the bandwagon and make games that make people buy the console, or will people buy the console, which makes developers want to make games? So it’s already a big challenge when you release a new console because you end up not knowing if you have enough games to sell a console, or if enough consoles are sold to sell a game.

“What I want from the PS5 is, Sony made some awesome exclusives, I mean I bought PS4 because Bloodborne was on console, and they got a whole sale for that one exclusive. And I think Microsoft has faltered in that area, though you look at how many developers Microsoft has bought in the last year, I think they finally figured out you need exclusives if you want to sell the console, and they need to be good… anyway, so I have hopes that the next generation of consoles will have great exclusives, and that Sony and Microsoft figure out that if you release a console that can play all the old games, you have a user base that is likelier to jump on board because they can play their huge catalog of games. If I have 100 games on Xbox 360 and 100 games on Xbox One, and a new Xbox comes out that plays all my Xbox 360 and Xbox One games, I am much likelier to buy the new Xbox than I am to buy any other console.”

 

[Psajdak]

PS5 definitely won't.

 

[baphomet]

Sounds like he knows literally nothing.

Both consoles will be backwards compatible, even though that shit doesn't matter.

 

[luca_29_bg]

ps5 will be backwards compatible, we already know this from a while.

 

[Bakkus]

Must also be backwards with PS3 games because that controller is awful. Yeah I guess you can play the games without rumble using PS4 controller...

 

[wipeout364]

ps5 will be backwards compatible, we already know this from a while.

Did they officially announce it. I missed it if they did.

 

[The_Mike]

Sounds like he knows literally nothing.

Both consoles will be backwards compatible, even though that shit doesn't matter.

Hey, it matters if Sony has it.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

Its not more easy that only give us a PS2 mini version and fans can hack it to put all the games?

 

[cdthree]

Wouldn't Sony and Microsoft have to intentionally block their next machines from being backwards compatible next generation? Same OS's, CPU families, GPU families. Basically a next generation of PC that will run this generation of software faster? Shouldn't all this generation's software run out of the box? That would piss off your entire fanbase telling them buy new remastered software from last generation. Yeah it's not a technical limitation, we just want to sell you the same software twice.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Wouldn't Sony and Microsoft have to intentionally block their next machines from being backwards compatible next generation? Same OS's, CPU families, GPU families. Basically a next generation of PC that will run this generation of software faster? Shouldn't all this generation's software run out of the box? That would piss off your entire fanbase telling them buy new remastered software from last generation. Yeah it's not a technical limitation, we just want to sell you the same software twice.

The OS on either system won't be the same (why would they be?), the Jaguar cores are not in the same family as Ryzen cores, and the GPUs will probably be Vega based. None of that is the same. Considerable work will have to be done for backwards compatibility. Although it should be less work than it was to get 360 games to work on the XB1. You make it sound like it's as easy trading your dusty old pc with windows 7 to a new one with windows 10 and reinstalling all your old games.

 

[Mattyp]

Wouldn't Sony and Microsoft have to intentionally block their next machines from being backwards compatible next generation? Same OS's, CPU families, GPU families. Basically a next generation of PC that will run this generation of software faster? Shouldn't all this generation's software run out of the box? That would piss off your entire fanbase telling them buy new remastered software from last generation. Yeah it's not a technical limitation, we just want to sell you the same software twice.

There’s a fair bit of work involved, it’s like games not coded for Windows 10 but worked fine on 95. I believe it will be a lot easier for Microsoft to implement since they’ve been working towards that the entire gen, hopefully Sony puts the effort in. But users don’t want to play old games so who knows.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I think this is the second article involving Hellpoint (Cradle Games) in the past few weeks? They sure have a lot to say.

It's as if the clothing maker who makes the 38th most popular brand of jeans has important news to share in the blue jeans industry.

 

[Imtjnotu]

Hey, it matters if Sony has it.

It has to matter seeing as how they are the only ones pumping out games before the gen ends

 

[FranXico]

PS5 definitely won't.

How do you know?

 

[cdthree]

The OS on either system won't be the same (why would they be?), the Jaguar cores are not in the same family as Ryzen cores, and the GPUs will probably be Vega based. None of that is the same. Considerable work will have to be done for backwards compatibility. Although it should be less work than it was to get 360 games to work on the XB1. You make it sound like it's as easy trading your dusty old pc with windows 7 to a new one with windows 10 and reinstalling all your old games.

So you're saying Microsoft is going to custom write a brand new OS for the next Xbox that completely breaks compatibility? Unlikely. Although they did spend 400 million dollars designing a controller. The Xbox 360 CPU was a custom designed Power PC. Completely different architecture from what's in the Xbox One. I vaguely remember it being said it was designed off of the cell processor? The next set of CPU and GPU are still coming from AMD and is the same lineage as the Xbox One. The reason Nintendo almost always has backward compatibility on their consoles and mobile platforms is because they basically use the same chipsets for two or three generations. "Two GameCube's duct taped together?"

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Sounds like he knows literally nothing.

Both consoles will be backwards compatible, even though that shit doesn't matter.

As much as I like backwards compability, I really don’t think it’s as important as everyone claims. When people get their hands on a new shiny console, I think the last thing on their minds are, wonder what my last generation games look like on my new $500 console? If it has it, cool. If not, oh well, not the end of the world.

 

[cdthree]

There’s a fair bit of work involved, it’s like games not coded for Windows 10 but worked fine on 95. I believe it will be a lot easier for Microsoft to implement since they’ve been working towards that the entire gen, hopefully Sony puts the effort in. But users don’t want to play old games so who knows.

That's not how PC games work, though. Games coded for prior Windows generations work well under new Windows generations. I was always amazed I could put a 10 year old game into my PC running the new Windows and get it to work. Even though on the box it said it wasn't supported. Not sure about 8.1 and beyond cause I bowed out after that hot mess.

 

[Mattyp]

That's not how PC games work, though. Games coded for prior Windows generations work well under new Windows generations. I was always amazed I could put a 10 year old game into my PC running the new Windows and get it to work. Even though on the box it said it wasn't supported. Not sure about 8.1 and beyond cause I bowed out after that hot mess.

They do work now because of the work Microsoft has put in and those games run under compatibility mode or literally a shell version of the OS they where originally coded for, that wasn't always the way and there used to be major headaches growing up through the versions of Windows probably should of explained that better on behalf.

 

[FranXico]

As much as I like backwards compability, I really don’t think it’s as important as everyone claims. When people get their hands on a new shiny console, I think the last thing on their minds are, wonder what my last generation games look like on my new $500 console? If it has it, cool. If not, oh well, not the end of the world.

At launch, it matters a lot. I want to be able to clear my previous generation backlog on my shiny new console.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The thing about PC BC is that most of the time it should work.... but it depends how good your PC is. So just like consoles, if you'r PC is old it may not work.

I am typing on a laptop from 6-7 years ago running on a 1.7 ghz cpu and an Nvidia GT445M which at the time was a decent laptop. How many AAA games can I run in the past 5 years?

 

[cdthree]

They do work now because of the work Microsoft has put in and those games run under compatibility mode or literally a shell version of the OS they where originally coded for, that wasn't always the way and there used to be major headaches growing up through the versions of Windows probably should of explained that better on behalf.

Was a PC gamer for a long time and never had a problem with that back in the day. Basically that was a major selling point of games on Windows, and basically any software on Windows. Backwards compatibility. Windows biggest strength and it's biggest downfall is legacy support. Anyone remember that emulator to run PlayStation games on Windows? That was pretty cool.

 

[bumleforce]

Xbox is a no brainer. Ps5 I can see being compatable with ps4 games but not 3 2 or 1 due to how psn was set up. At least they will have some form of bc. Nintendo on the other hand. They will most likely not make switch 1 games not bc on switch 2 because why not. People will buy them again.

 

[Gamezone]

Consoles without BC in 2020 is really wierd. If publishers are aiming for a digital future we can't keep reseting out library each time a new console is released.

 

[ZywyPL]

The OS on either system won't be the same (why would they be?), the Jaguar cores are not in the same family as Ryzen cores, and the GPUs will probably be Vega based. None of that is the same.

Look at the smartphones market as an example - different OS, different specs, different producers, and yet - all the apps and games work perfectly fine, how? Because it's the same, ARM architecture, hence no emulation is and will ever be required. And same applies to the consoles now since they switched to x86 architecture - Jaguar, Ryzen, Intel's Core, old Athlons, Pentiums etc., all are able to run the same code just like that, the only major difference is the performance level, that's why current PCs can run 20-30 year old games with no additional work required. GPU? The same thing, after GPUs went to unified shaders architecture it's all basically the same hardware, especially on AMD side, where it's the same old GCN architecture for almost a decade, there is virtually zero difference in Fury vs Vega vs Polaris TFlops, Navi most likely won't be an exception either. So yes, overall it IS all the same, spec-wise consoles are now basically PCs with fixed specification, nothing more.

PS. Next Xbox will run on Win10 no matter what, so it simplified things even further.

Considerable work will have to be done for backwards compatibility. Although it should be less work than it was to get 360 games to work on the XB1. You make it sound like it's as easy trading your dusty old pc with windows 7 to a new one with windows 10 and reinstalling all your old games.

Because it is. It takes literally one day to port PS4/XB1 games to Pro/X, and also literally just one person to just tweak the config file to adjust the graphics/performance and a newer, more power hardware. And the same situation will happen when next-gen consoles arrive, with the most lazy effort being just setting the resolution to native 4K on PS5/XB2 vs 1800p/1440p/1080p/900p on X1X/PS4P/PS4/X1S. That's all it really takes, people have been doing it on PC for decades. Consoles moved away from exotic, overcomplicated architectures, that's a game changer that needs to be taken into serious consideration whenever discussing BC in consoles now.

 

[Aintitcool]

And with wii every gamecube game worked. Although he wrong, it wasn't simulation, the wii was just 2 duck taped gamecubes together. Wii u also didn't really need to emulate much, still an IBM Power PC and ATI Gpu.

 

[ultrazilla]

Nothing from Sony leads me to believe they'd suddenly embrace backwards compatibility on their system. I expect to see Playstation Now more aggressively promoted(it'd make a hell of a PSN +incentive also).

Microsoft I expect there to be backwards compatibility out of the box day 1.

 

[Psajdak]

How do you know?

Just a hunch.

 

[Three]

PS5 definitely won't.

Just a hunch.

"Definitely won't" isn't presenting it as a hunch. It makes it seem like you know something. "Probably won't" would have been more appropriate.

 

[Bogroll]

Wow, never in a million years thought any of them would be.

 

[Woodchipper]

This is pretty much the only problem I have with Sony. Not being able to play my digital PS3 games, and PSone classics for that matter, on my PS4 is very irritating. I really, REALLY hope they fix this for PS5.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Just my 2 cents but if PS5 is totally back compat with PS4 next gen war is already decided.

With how big the install base is for PS4 how many are going to want to start over with a new library next gen?

 

[Panajev2001a]

PS5 definitely won't.

Based on?

 

[Panajev2001a]

Nothing from Sony leads me to believe they'd suddenly embrace backwards compatibility on their system. I expect to see Playstation Now more aggressively promoted(it'd make a hell of a PSN +incentive also).

Microsoft I expect there to be backwards compatibility out of the box day 1.

Beside a much much bigger transition of HW architecture from PS3 to PS4 and how consumer reacted (both PS4 and Switch left BC aside, NES games are not the kind of BC some people here shout about daily and you need to pay a monthly fee for them, and both consoles were massively rewarded by the public... what gives?), I think Sony appreciates their back catalogue and especially understands that with so many games being bought digitally if they say to PS5 customers that their recently bought PS4 game now ought to be streamed... mmmh, they know people would revolt and it would be super bad launch PR: I do not think they will make such a stupid mistake.
Digital games ownership will be a massive force to drive BC.

PSNow with downloadable games and no PSN+ fee for multiplayer required is a parallel initiative to BC IMHO.

How did it come that a company who did a tons tons more work on BC for about 20 years than the other on consoles (down to enhance new HW to facilitate BC, reusing previous SoC’s as co-processors in the new model, allow disc based no downloads required BC with two generation of consoles to have the apparently enormous sea of gamers demanding BC essentially not being able to care any less... sadly) is now the one that is “unlikely” to “embrace” BC?

Out of years of consoles (all beside PSOne obviously), PS4 is the only one where BC did not take a front and centre space and yes I do appreciate MS invested in BC and has OG Xbox and Xbox 360 games available (although people make it seem like 80-90% of all games of both consoles are available), but... I think we are being a bit prematurely pessimistic and I would like to hear more about the logical reasoning behind it at least.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Hey, it matters if Sony has it.

It is a strong PR and vocal forum event, but had digital downloads not take such a massive uptake this generation I would disagree.

Consumers could not really care that much about the level of BC in the first year of PS3 of the market (disc BC with a humongous list of titles for two generation of consoles), Switch kicked BC to the curb and is reselling Wii U games with minor changes at a markup and they are selling gang busters, PS4 (for obvious reasons) has to leave BC with PS3 titles locally out and consumers still bought the platform at a very very impressive pace meanwhile all the, honestly great, work MS has done on enhanced BC has not made a huge dent in sales over time (but we know it was part of their course correction that avoided an even worse scenario).

Based on that, if digital downloads on both platforms had not risen so much in the last 4-5 years, I would say that BC is only a cherry on top if you do everything else perfect and even if you do not have it (I DO want to have it ) it is not that consumer unfriendly as you are giving them things they care much more about.

 

[1inthechamber_]

I expect backwards compatibility on both. Not a system seller but the option is always nice.

 

[jshackles]

I don't really trust Sony to do backwards compatibility correctly, if I'm being perfectly honest. A huge part of their subscription model currently relies on it actually being done incorrectly. I imagine if it's there at all, it'll be the guy that was interviewed in OP's article's worst nightmare scenario - only certain games will be approved, and even then it'll probably just be digital-only (ie I probably won't be able to put my Bloodborne disk in the PS5 and play it, but if I own the digital version I'll be able to download it). I'd love to be proven wrong.

Microsoft has had a huge commitment to backwards compatibility this gen and I suspect they already know their new console is DOA if it doesn't include that feature. The One already has three generations playable on it, and if the new Xbox has four generations it'll be that much better.

I'm likely to buy both eventually since that's what I always do, but I have a strong suspicion I'll be gravitating towards the next Xbox early next gen, and BC is the reason.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I don't really trust Sony to do backwards compatibility correctly, if I'm being perfectly honest. A huge part of their subscription model currently relies on it actually being done incorrectly.

Certainly your opinion, but can you substantiate it a bit more? Why should not BC and streaming coexist? Are you then afraid that XCloud and Xbox Scarlet are going to kill off “proper” BC too then (else I am not sure why the double standard here)?

MS did indeed spent precious resources in a lot of directions to catch up with the competition and in that state, luckily for us, many companies try al the possible low hanging fruits to quickly change that. BC with a growing list of titles (we are not remotely close to say like 80% of OG Xbox and Xbox 360 titles atm, unless I am mistaken) is one of them and congrats to them for putting it in and adding enhancements to the games.
Going beyond that and take more than 15 years of BC support and investment in almost all of the HW products, why PS would now be the least trusted name in BC beside partially for the effect of the last example people see is necessarily the new trend.

 

[jshackles]

Certainly your opinion, but can you substantiate it a bit more? Why should not BC and streaming coexist? Are you then afraid that XCloud and Xbox Scarlet are going to kill off “proper” BC too then (else I am not sure why the double standard here)?

MS did indeed spent precious resources in a lot of directions to catch up with the competition and in that state, luckily for us, many companies try al the possible low hanging fruits to quickly change that. BC with a growing list of titles (we are not remotely close to say like 80% of OG Xbox and Xbox 360 titles atm, unless I am mistaken) is one of them and congrats to them for putting it in and adding enhancements to the games.
Going beyond that and take more than 15 years of BC support and investment in almost all of the HW products, why PS would now be the least trusted name in BC beside partially for the effect of the last example people see is necessarily the new trend.

I had high hopes when they announced Playstation 2 backwards compatibility for the PS4 - the PS2 library was huge and contained a large number of well loved franchises (God of War, Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc). A quick search tells me that since that was announced in 2015, there are currently a total of 52 games available (two listed here are bundles) and while they did add uprezzing and trophy support (which is great) they definitely let me down in several ways: 1) previous PS2 Classics purchases on the PS3 did not carry over, 2) the selection is extremely limited and remains that way (we got a total of two games in 2018 - one in March, another in June), 3) disc games cannot be used to download the new versions, which is a feature the Xbox offers. All the franchises I listed above are excluded save Jak and Daxter, which is baffling considering I'm sure people would love the original God of War games to be available and those are first party. On top of this, every Playstation console right up until the PS4 could play PS1 games. The PS3 had "PS1 Classics" available digitally even though it's not a complete library. The PS4 not only can't play PS1 discs (apparently due to them not buying a CD laser, as it also cannot play audio CDs) but it can't play the PS1 Classics from PSN either. And like the PS2 Classics, I'm pretty certain if the feature were introduced, they would expect people to re-buy the games again.

Meanwhile, any time Microsoft adds a BC game, if you already own it digitally it's ready to be downloaded and played. If you own the disc, you can pop it in your system and play the digital version which uses the disc as physical DRM.

Given the two approaches this generation, I don't stand by my assertion that I don't trust Sony not to fuck it up. It's a personal opinion sure, but one formed on my own personal experiences with both consoles.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I had high hopes when they announced Playstation 2 backwards compatibility for the PS4 - the PS2 library was huge and contained a large number of well loved franchises (God of War, Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc). A quick search tells me that since that was announced in 2015, there are currently a total of 52 games available (two listed here are bundles) and while they did add uprezzing and trophy support (which is great) they definitely let me down in several ways: 1) previous PS2 Classics purchases on the PS3 did not carry over, 2) the selection is extremely limited and remains that way (we got a total of two games in 2018 - one in March, another in June), 3) disc games cannot be used to download the new versions, which is a feature the Xbox offers. All the franchises I listed above are excluded save Jak and Daxter, which is baffling considering I'm sure people would love the original God of War games to be available and those are first party. On top of this, every Playstation console right up until the PS4 could play PS1 games. The PS3 had "PS1 Classics" available digitally even though it's not a complete library. The PS4 not only can't play PS1 discs (apparently due to them not buying a CD laser, as it also cannot play audio CDs) but it can't play the PS1 Classics from PSN either. And like the PS2 Classics, I'm pretty certain if the feature were introduced, they would expect people to re-buy the games again.

Meanwhile, any time Microsoft adds a BC game, if you already own it digitally it's ready to be downloaded and played. If you own the disc, you can pop it in your system and play the digital version which uses the disc as physical DRM.

Given the two approaches this generation, I don't stand by my assertion that I don't trust Sony not to fuck it up. It's a personal opinion sure, but one formed on my own personal experiences with both consoles.

Sure, but it is also likely that Sony will reverse its course if it is what consumers really demand as they did what you say for all the other console generations (same PSOne title could be downloaded to PS3, PSP, and PSVita for example).

The big big big big point is the digital libraries people invested in with Xbox One and PS4 and it is not a small percentage of software there that needs to carry over one way or the other: this is why so think PS5 will be BC with PS4 titles (acting as a PS4 Pro++, it is possible that they have been adding code and features in the PS4 SDK’s given to developers to make it easier in the past year or so too) and other content you purchased and added to your account.

 

[Clear]

Given the two approaches this generation, I don't stand by my assertion that I don't trust Sony not to fuck it up. It's a personal opinion sure, but one formed on my own personal experiences with both consoles.

There are good technical reasons why PS3 B/C is problematic on PS4, and good business reasons why broad-scale support of PS2/PS1 emulation is of debatable value on the same platform.

However, neither of these issues are in-play with PS5 supporting PS4 titles. So I'd say its a lock.

 

[Akuza89]

The next xbox will be without a doubt, it's been their saving grace this gen.

Playstation I really am questioning if they will, people think they will go "whole hog" and make games from ps1 to ps4 backwards compatible which I can't see happening, playstation prefer to have a setup of "sure you can play these games... just pay us this per month". Surely PS4 games should be a top priority at working on the ps5.

It'll be interesting to see both sides stance on this really.

Nintendo seem to have made their stance with it... clearly with the switch being cartridge based... However things could still come via other services like the NES online style.

 

[Fake]

Hope so. The migration of ps3 for ps4 was a little hard because of the launch tittles. With proper BC at least we can continue gaming while waiting the first games to release.

 

[Shmunter]

I would be beyond surprised to see no BC. Creating an eco system requires continuity. If buying a PS5 means starting from zero, it gives PS4 owners a way to jump ship. I can’t see it happening in this day and age, and likely never again.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I would be beyond surprised to see no BC. Creating an eco system requires continuity. If buying a PS5 means starting from zero, it gives PS4 owners a way to jump ship. I can’t see it happening in this day and age, and likely never again.

I am still of the firm belief that the Pro served two purposes for them. 1) to test the BC efforts going forward, especially with the patents in testing they filed along with it (needed a PS4 profile to run non-Pro patched games with slight boosts to some), and 2) the additional power option.

It was successful at both, thus those same profiles will be in the PS5 SDK, for PS4/Pro software BC moving forward in the ecosystem.

 

[Pallas]

Beside a much much bigger transition of HW architecture from PS3 to PS4 and how consumer reacted (both PS4 and Switch left BC aside, NES games are not the kind of BC some people here shout about daily and you need to pay a monthly fee for them, and both consoles were massively rewarded by the public... what gives?), I think Sony appreciates their back catalogue and especially understands that with so many games being bought digitally if they say to PS5 customers that their recently bought PS4 game now ought to be streamed... mmmh, they know people would revolt and it would be super bad launch PR: I do not think they will make such a stupid mistake.
Digital games ownership will be a massive force to drive BC.

PSNow with downloadable games and no PSN+ fee for multiplayer required is a parallel initiative to BC IMHO.

How did it come that a company who did a tons tons more work on BC for about 20 years than the other on consoles (down to enhance new HW to facilitate BC, reusing previous SoC’s as co-processors in the new model, allow disc based no downloads required BC with two generation of consoles to have the apparently enormous sea of gamers demanding BC essentially not being able to care any less... sadly) is now the one that is “unlikely” to “embrace” BC?

Out of years of consoles (all beside PSOne obviously), PS4 is the only one where BC did not take a front and centre space and yes I do appreciate MS invested in BC and has OG Xbox and Xbox 360 games available (although people make it seem like 80-90% of all games of both consoles are available), but... I think we are being a bit prematurely pessimistic and I would like to hear more about the logical reasoning behind it at least.

Everyone who is skeptical of backwards compatibility for the PS5 outside of the obvious(It has to be back compatible with PS4 games right...?) are reasonably in the right. After all the PS4 is more than capable of playing PS1/PS2 games, even if you own the physical disc, I imagine with a few patches it should be good to go, don’t you agree? So why don’t they do it?

Edit: and while I’ll give you PS3 games not being compatible due to the architectural difference, you’d have to remember that the XboxOne can play 360 games and it being a less powerful system, and the 360 and PS3 are more alike than people like to agree.

 

[Baron Samedi]

Sounds like he knows literally nothing.

Both consoles will be backwards compatible, even though that shit doesn't matter.

To you... a lot of people care about keeping their content.

 

[Baron Samedi]

"Definitely won't" isn't presenting it as a hunch. It makes it seem like you know something. "Probably won't" would have been more appropriate.

You need to chill.

 

[anthraticus]

Sounds like he knows literally nothing.

Both consoles will be backwards compatible, even though that shit doesn't matter.

If I were to get a console it would matter to me... a LOT, since I skipped out on consoles this gen.

 

[Chozofication_]

Everyone who is skeptical of backwards compatibility for the PS5 outside of the obvious(It has to be back compatible with PS4 games right...?) are reasonably in the right. After all the PS4 is more than capable of playing PS1/PS2 games, even if you own the physical disc, I imagine with a few patches it should be good to go, don’t you agree? So why don’t they do it?

Edit: and while I’ll give you PS3 games not being compatible due to the architectural difference, you’d have to remember that the XboxOne can play 360 games and it being a less powerful system, and the 360 and PS3 are more alike than people like to agree.

Nah the 360 is the better machine but its xenon cpu is quite outclassed by the cell processor in pure power.

Also Sony are no where near as adept at emulation as MS. No way they could have had ps3 bc on ps4 but yes for ps2 they had no excuse they're just lazy/greedy.

 

[Kerotan Frog]

I hope so. I don't trade consoles, but it would be nice to just use one PS console to PS4 and PS5 games. It would be cool if the games ran better too.