Makes sense.The store needs to be kept secure, as it handles money transactions and license mediation. This requires ongoing continuous support both on the back-end and the console client.
Data storage is basically a big FTP repository, and as data only really flows downstream they can just incorporate it into their global storage footprint along with the PS4 and PS5 library. Permissions will get handled the same way based on PS+ and/or purchase entitlement. From the perspective of server handling, its all the same.
Absolutely wild that Killzone trilogy, Resistance trilogy, Motorstorm trilogy, The Ratchet and clank games and metal gear solid 4 will effectively cease to exist after july. Bad move sony.
Gee, what some of us have been saying this whole time about the Download List.
This so much, it's like people defending sony don't even own PS3 and Vita or know how PS Store works.Gee, what some of us have been saying this whole time about the Download List.
Some Sony fanboys.PS execs :
same for old books and music right? get rid of em, too old.I wonder how many of you moaning about this actually bought PS3 or Vita games recently.
Is it a shame, yes, is it surprising, no. I don't see why a console that was released in 2006 should still be supported now.
Well, it depends on the person and what the company's motive is.This is why we need game preservation because of this issue, this is why I’m not too keen about an all digital future and to those who are actual coming up with excuses, shame on you.
This is why we need game preservation because of this issue, this is why I’m not too keen about an all digital future and to those who are actual coming up with excuses, shame on you.
ofcourse, because you understand everyone motives and can lump them in a straw man you see fit. Everyone in a tiny little box that makes you understand how can anyone be complaining about something you don't care about.This has got nothing to do with preservation its just dummies acting hysterically based on an impulse to hoard and FOMO.
ofcourse, because you understand everyone motives and can lump them in a straw man you see fit. Everyone in a tiny little box that makes you understand how can anyone be complaining about something you don't care about.
A bit different when they can work on anything pretty much.same for old books and music right? get rid of em, too old.
I said a similar thing comparing console stores to Steam and GOG. If they can offer multiple platforms in their online stores where all a gamer has to do is filter by Windows, OSX and Linux, how hard can it be to have Sony servers to adjust the store to have PS3, PS4 and PS5?
Was there even a big outcry similar to this when Nintendo shut down the Wii shop or is outrage only exclusive to PlayStation?
The funny thing is that the "old" PlayStation Store on the Web (for which they finally sealed off the last remnants a few days ago) did have such filtering options. It's just that for whatever reason, they totally revamped the Web-based store, to a different format and design which is almost universally considered to be inferior to the old one. Many features were cut, one of which was the ability to filter by platform. Since the design staff couldn't be bothered to code in a proper filter, Sony's "solution" to the problem is to simply cut off purchasing access to that content altogether.
(If you think about it, there must be some sort of filter on the back end...otherwise, how would they be able to distinguish that a piece of content is for an older system and should be hidden from view?)
There were some complaints, for sure. I think the outrage is larger for Sony''s situation, since Nintendo's online store was regarded as much weaker, in terms of available content and consumer reach. There was considerably more content available for PS3, even at that time, despite the Wii having a much larger user base. I'd bet even the PSP and Vita racked up more digital sales than the Wii ever did.
Nintendo's situation was actually significantly worse, since purchases are bound to a single system. You could (even today) redownload your purchased content to the same Wii system that it was originally purchased from...and only to that system. If you purchase another Wii (e.g. for another room, or because your old one broke), then you can't download to that system.
As someone who purchased a PS3 game just before Christmas and has a pretty big PS3 digital library and exclusively digital on Vita, I'm not that bothered. All I care about is being able to download the games I bought already, which is being kept. They are giving me fair warning to buy any more games I want before then.I wonder how many of you moaning about this actually bought PS3 or Vita games recently.
Is it a shame, yes, is it surprising, no. I don't see why a console that was released in 2006 should still be supported now.
I wonder how many of you moaning about this actually bought PS3 or Vita games recently.
If some technology dies with a system, I think at some point most people understand.
However, if the motive is something like pressuring gamers to rebuy games on a newer system by cutting off access to old games that's different. And with digital files, there's no manufacturing discs or store inventory. It's literally like GOG selling a 1990 game for $2 right beside Cyberpunk 2077 for $50. They do it. There isn't a hard cut off where every game that came out before 2010 is inaccessible.
Spot on X.(raises hand)
I agree with most of what you said, but I don't think this is being done to "pressure" people to buy the games on a newer system. The overwhelming majority of non-cross-buy games aren't on the newer systems...and if someone already had the game for the older system, they aren't being forced to repurchase the game.
Some people in this thread are shouting "greed"...but it's really not that at all. If anything, it's more like laziness, either in programming the new PS Store and/or negotiating rights to software licenses that might be expiring.
Take the PS1 classics, for example. They never brought those to PS4 or PS5. But, it's not like they're reselling those particular games on PS4 or PS5. They're not available at all on those systems. That is what people are complaining about.
There's no reason these games have to vanish from the digital marketplace. Sony should do at least one of the following (preferably both):
Removing old PS1 games isn't going to cause someone buy some other newer, different game for PS4 or PS5 instead. It will cause him to buy nothing. There's no intersection here.
- Keep those games available for purchase for PS3/PSP/PS Vita, for people who still own and enjoy those systems
- Make those games available for purchase for PS4/PS5 (and with cross-buy carryover this time around...not like the stunt they pulled with PS2 classics)
Its not just a matter of filtration. The download list option filters according to what games registered to your account are appropriate for the host system, whereas of course for the purposes of trophies it needs make no such distinction.
Shutting down the sales portal cuts off the bridge between the provider and the buyer, its not just consumers that are affected by this change its the content providers too who now will have to go via PSNow or some new alternative if they wish to monetize their content. Essentially it allows Sony to close a whole bunch of business accounts that most likely have been sitting idle for years, or get them to revise their thinking about how they'd like to deal in the future.
Point being, its not just about the consumer. Simply allowing existing "owned" (i.e. licensed) content to continue to be downloaded fully covers that angle, and this is much more about the business side of things.
Last I checked, Yoshida is still working at Sony.Source?
Yoshida would never allow this to happen.
Just picked up a copy of PS3 Nights.
Then remembered I have it on fucking Steam
Wouldn't it be beneficial for everyone to allow publishers and/developers to "opt in" on keeping their PS3/PSP/Vita content available on the online store?
(raises hand)
I agree with most of what you said, but I don't think this is being done to "pressure" people to buy the games on a newer system. The overwhelming majority of non-cross-buy games aren't on the newer systems...and if someone already had the game for the older system, they aren't being forced to repurchase the game.
Some people in this thread are shouting "greed"...but it's really not that at all. If anything, it's more like laziness, either in programming the new PS Store and/or negotiating rights to software licenses that might be expiring.
Take the PS1 classics, for example. They never brought those to PS4 or PS5. But, it's not like they're reselling those particular games on PS4 or PS5. They're not available at all on those systems. That is what people are complaining about.
There's no reason these games have to vanish from the digital marketplace. Sony should do at least one of the following (preferably both):
Removing old PS1 games isn't going to cause someone buy some other newer, different game for PS4 or PS5 instead. It will cause him to buy nothing. There's no intersection here.
- Keep those games available for purchase for PS3/PSP/PS Vita, for people who still own and enjoy those systems
- Make those games available for purchase for PS4/PS5 (and with cross-buy carryover this time around...not like the stunt they pulled with PS2 classics)
My god...how ignorant of preservation can you be? If you don't take steps to preserve something while it can still be bought then when it can't be bought anymore (which will happen whether you want to believe it or not) it'll already be too late...it'll already be lost to time.This is not about preservation, because if something is just available to buy it doesn't need to preserved
I have no horse in this race as I owned neither a PSP, PS3 or Vita. However this is worrisome for a product that’s only 10 years old. It’s good that you will be able to still download your purchases but seems only right that that would be the case. Seems pretty “googlish” but nowhere near as bad. Just makes me more concerned about an all digital future where publishers can potentially pull downloads from stores on a whim.
Wouldn't it be beneficial for everyone to allow publishers and/developers to "opt in" on keeping their PS3/PSP/Vita content available on the online store?
As I mentioned before its more I suspect about the maintaining the security of these portals than any other administrative aspect. Essentially while these things remain live they need to be kept secure for the benefit of both themselves and their clients (business and consumer), and that requires a team be kept around to maintain them in case some new vulnerability or exploit is discovered.