Support NeoGAF

[ChuckeRearmed]

I am saying that it likely helped Sony establish a foothold by gaining trust during that time.

No. Games. Sony established the foothold due to exclusive games, partnerships etc. Also it was a media brand even before the consoles.

BTW, from what I've read, during the PS1 era, Sony didn't really have to "moneyhat" developers. It was just cheaper for them to develop on the PS1 and the licensing costs were better on the Sony side which you can argue is using money as a leverage but it isn't really what we all call "moneyhat" now.

I don't remember what exactly happened in PS1 generation but what I know is that Sony bought game publisher upon its entry in the game market and also got some game exclusivities. Having CDs of course helped.

Sony - like Nintendo now - is popular now because it has never stumbled in games basically. Even PS3 generation produced great games later on. It is all about games. But like with everything - it won't last forever. How it's gonna look in the future we'll see, but I doubt Sega events will happen again.

Still if MS failed in XSX generation, it could have quit gaming - Sony had successful PS4 generation and did not fail at PS5. It is basically the repeat of PS1 -> PS2 era with PS1 being PS4, PS2 - being PS5 (we don't know yet because PS2 is a legendary console and I doubt anything similar will appear in our lifetimes). MS is Sega - quite ironic - with Xbox One being Sega Saturn and XSX being Sega Dreamcast (without games though lol). It is kinda similar anyway. If MS failed XSX launch it would be Dreamcast again (with deeper pockets though).

P.S. Keep in mind I don't consider sales for comparison because the modern market is much bigger than 90s-early 2000s so the consoles will sell more anyway.

P.p.s Sony has a lot of stars aligned to be successful - media brand -> music, movies; big market share -> better deals, more deals; diverse games - Japanese market in general that brings western players etc.

 

[sainraja]

No. Games. Sony established the foothold due to exclusive games, partnerships etc. Also it was a media brand even before the consoles.


I don't remember what exactly happened in PS1 generation but what I know is that Sony bought game publisher upon its entry in the game market and also got some game exclusivities. Having CDs of course helped.

Sony - like Nintendo now - is popular now because it has never stumbled in games basically. Even PS3 generation produced great games later on. It is all about games. But like with everything - it won't last forever. How it's gonna look in the future we'll see, but I doubt Sega events will happen again.

Still if MS failed in XSX generation, it could have quit gaming - Sony had successful PS4 generation and did not fail at PS5. It is basically the repeat of PS1 -> PS2 era with PS1 being PS4, PS2 - being PS5 (we don't know yet because PS2 is a legendary console and I doubt anything similar will appear in our lifetimes). MS is Sega - quite ironic - with Xbox One being Sega Saturn and XSX being Sega Dreamcast (without games though lol). It is kinda similar anyway. If MS failed XSX launch it would be Dreamcast again (with deeper pockets though).

P.S. Keep in mind I don't consider sales for comparison because the modern market is much bigger than 90s-early 2000s so the consoles will sell more anyway.

P.p.s Sony has a lot of stars aligned to be successful - media brand -> music, movies; big market share -> better deals, more deals; diverse games - Japanese market in general that brings western players etc.

It was during the PS2 era where Sony funded exclusives and made partnerships; regardless, you keep missing the point. I am not saying games weren't the reason. Content will always be reason #1 as it has been proved many times over. But, and I am not sure if I should, I can keep repeating myself but we are basically talking over each other. So, I don't really have anymore to add to this conversation. =/

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

It was during the PS2 era where Sony funded exclusives and made partnerships; regardless, you keep missing the point. I am not saying games weren't the reason. Content will always be reason #1 as it has been proved many times over. But, and I am not sure if I should, I can keep repeating myself but we are basically talking over each other. So, I don't really have anymore to add to this conversation. =/

You keep saying that backwards compatibility is what allowed Sony to be successful, but I said that it was not. We disagreed quite early on)

 

[sainraja]

You keep saying that backwards compatibility is what allowed Sony to be successful, but I said that it was not. We disagreed quite early on)

This is why I said you are missing the point. I am actually not saying that. I've tried explaining my point of view (there can be more than one reason for a company's success with each having a different level of influence.)

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

This is why I said you are missing the point. I am actually not saying that. I've tried explaining my point of view (there can be more than one reason for a company's success with each having a different level of influence.)

You said that MS is pushing backwards compatibility because they think it could be one of the reasons why PS succeeded.
I said that their push has nothing to do with Sony's success because it was not something that let Sony succeed in the first place.

 

[sainraja]

You said that MS is pushing backwards compatibility because they think it could be one of the reasons why PS succeeded.
I said that their push has nothing to do with Sony's success because it was not something that let Sony succeed in the first place.

Sony offered backwards compatibility with the PS2 and PS3. They didn't really do anything to 'prevent' it from succeeding. By offering the feature on two console generations they learned that it wasn't utilized that much once a console had matured with its own library of games (meaning, b/c is a nice to have feature, but usually not the most important.) They ended up sunsetting it on the PS3 due to costs and dropping it altogether on the PS4. They chose to invest money elsewhere after that. This isn't really what needs to be discussed as it has been covered many times.

Also, you might want to go back and re-read what I said. I don't know what Microsoft's actual motivation is in pursuing backwards compatibility but I would be really surprised if they weren't looking at what Sony/Nintendo did in the past to become who they are today. You are welcome to disagree but it was just something I was wondering about, not necessarily saying is the case.

 

[nani17]

What would they do? Why would they target MS when these emulators can run on any computer? Because it is a console? So MS is not supposed to let people run their own code because that means they could run emulators for consoles that are no longer manufactured? OK. That will sure make the small amount of people who are running these things buy Sony and Nintendo systems to get these games.

I don't think they'll excessively go at them but kindly ask them to sort it out. Nintendo usually goes after stuff like this or even stuff far less than this. Sony I'm not sure but I'll be shocked if Nintendo doesn't do anything

 

[Hudo]

When Microsoft is basically overlapping Sony in the backwards compatibility game.

 

[SkylineRKR]

I tried Ape Escape 2 on PS5. Its a glitch fest.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Sony offered backwards compatibility with the PS2 and PS3. They didn't really do anything to 'prevent' it from succeeding. By offering the feature on two console generations they learned that it wasn't utilized that much once a console had matured with its own library of games (meaning, b/c is a nice to have feature, but usually not the most important.) They ended up sunsetting it on the PS3 due to costs and dropping it altogether on the PS4. They chose to invest money elsewhere after that. This isn't really what needs to be discussed as it has been covered many times.

Also, you might want to go back and re-read what I said. I don't know what Microsoft's actual motivation is in pursuing backwards compatibility but I would be really surprised if they weren't looking at what Sony/Nintendo did in the past to become who they are today. You are welcome to disagree but it was just something I was wondering about, not necessarily saying is the case.

In your own post you contradict yourself - you stated that Sony dropped backwards compatibility because they found out that it is better to invest into something else and then you say that MS is doing backwards compatibility because they want to make the same mistake too Backwards compatibility has never been a thing on consoles - it existed in some form, but it has never been a selling point and never was taken seriously.

In fact - I would argue - only in this generation due to a lot of multi platform games - incomparable to the previous generation - backwards compatibility started to play some role.

Consoles has always been about games. I don't know about Switch - but I doubt people play backward compatibility games there that much if it supports. Gaming has always been about games, games, games - whether they are new titles, remasters or remakes (not sure where remaster culture started. Probably somewhere in Xbox 360? era but I honestly don't know as never paid attention).

Anyway should agree to disagree.

 

[CrustyBritches]

Only on GAF do a bunch of fanboys poo poo an awesome, unexpected feature like retail release of RetroArch and PPSSPP on Xbox. Sad little men.

 

[HoodWinked]

And yet PlayStation and Nintendo outsell Xbox every single generation.
It's big noise over some small irrelevant feature. There is far less people actually interested in playing old games than you think...

i dont understand responses like this are people so ingrained in their console tribalism that they parrot the company's talking points? what's it matter if the console sells more or less? and especially why the fuck do people keep saying this people dont play old games therefore it doesnt matter non-sense. it literally doesnt fucking matter if the usage among the population is low, it matter if "I" want to use it. By the same logic you can say why are people upgrading their apple watches most don't even use the new health functions, why do people buy high end cars when they can't drive past the speed limit.

 

[Senua]

Only on GAF do a bunch of fanboys poo poo an awesome, unexpected feature like retail release of RetroArch and PPSSPP on Xbox. Sad little men.

I have to use this pic way too much

 

[BlackM1st]

That funny moment when the Xbox will emulate more games from the PS1/PS2/PS3 era than the PS5

Awkward xD

 

[ExpandKong]

So hang on, it does PSP as well...and god willing someday some decent PS3 emulation.

So I could potentially play the entire Metal Gear franchise on a Series X?

I could finally throw my PS3 in the garbage where it's always belonged?

 

[CrustyBritches]

I have to use this pic way too much

It's another venue to play and preserve the classics, including that platform. I don't get it. You can just sit down and play Twisted Metal 2 or the God of War PSP games(that are amazing) right on your Xbox Series S|X in retail mode. It's fucking awesome. Same box plays Xbox, 360(auto HDR), Xbox One, and Series S|X games. For $299 it's a crazy steal of a deal.

 

[M1chl]

So hang on, it does PSP as well...and god willing someday some decent PS3 emulation.

So I could potentially play the entire Metal Gear franchise on a Series X?

I could finally throw my PS3 in the garbage where it's always belonged?

PS3 emulator is never guarantee and on the top of that, you would most likely need XSX for that. PS3 emulator is still in pretty early stage aka this stuff takes time.

 

[ExpandKong]

PS3 emulator is never guarantee and on the top of that, you would most likely need XSX for that. PS3 emulator is still in pretty early stage aka this stuff takes time.

I've decided already to get the X instead of the S whenever I get around to buying one of these things so no sweat there. MGS4 is literally the only reason I still have a PS3.

 

[sainraja]

In your own post you contradict yourself - you stated that Sony dropped backwards compatibility because they found out that it is better to invest into something else and then you say that MS is doing backwards compatibility because they want to make the same mistake too Backwards compatibility has never been a thing on consoles - it existed in some form, but it has never been a selling point and never was taken seriously.

In fact - I would argue - only in this generation due to a lot of multi platform games - incomparable to the previous generation - backwards compatibility started to play some role.

Consoles has always been about games. I don't know about Switch - but I doubt people play backward compatibility games there that much if it supports. Gaming has always been about games, games, games - whether they are new titles, remasters or remakes (not sure where remaster culture started. Probably somewhere in Xbox 360? era but I honestly don't know as never paid attention).

Anyway should agree to disagree.

I think you need to go back and re-read the conversation and what I originally stated. The argument you are trying to present as mine isn't what I have been saying. Things don't exist/happen in a vacuum; multiple factors can play a role in how things happen over the course of time (and they don't need to be weighted the same in terms of importance). Microsoft is heavily pushing for it right now and they can certainly succeed or might learn the same lessons as Sony. The part you seem to be taking issue with, which is what I had said, was that it is very much possible that Microsoft looked at what Sony did with their previous consoles and backwards compatibility was something they did.

I have said this in other posts and I think it bears repeating.....given how an ecosystem plays a huge rule in what phone people get now, I think it will also be a factor with consoles. Sony isn't blind to it either which is why PS5 supports PS4 games. I think going forward our libraries will move with us.

 

[sainraja]

PS3 emulator is never guarantee and on the top of that, you would most likely need XSX for that. PS3 emulator is still in pretty early stage aka this stuff takes time.

And someone in another thread was telling me how it's suppose to be so easy that even "fans" can do it. Yes, it does take time & resources.

 

[M1chl]

I've decided already to get the X instead of the S whenever I get around to buying one of these things so no sweat there. MGS4 is literally the only reason I still have a PS3.

Technically console is capable:

RPCS3 - Quickstart

Hardware requirements for RPCS3 may vary depending on your system. We cannot guarantee the performance of system specifications below the recommended requirements, but you're welcome to experiment.

rpcs3.net

However another story could be, if someone edit GPU calls to DirectX (from Vulkan), but hopefully does not sounds like too much work, when you have it up and running.

And someone in another thread was telling me how it's suppose to be so easy that even "fans" can do it. Yes, it does take time & resources.

Edit Vulkan calls > DirectX ones? Yeah possibly, but that does not mean you are going to be depended on further development of the software.

 

[TheContact]

Yeah, I think there is a good reason Sony hasn't invested as much into backwards compatibility like Microsoft has this time around. The payoff and time investment on our parts isn't that great, we say we want it but we don't really "use" it once we have newer games to play. You have to remember that Sony was the first (as far as I can tell) to offer backwards compatibility on consoles with the PS2. They continued that trend with the PS3. On the PS3, we had the option to play both PS1 & PS3 games. I think the PS3 generation was a turning point fo b/c and Sony.

I know Microsoft has brought that back into the mix so let's see what happens going forward but I wonder if Microsoft decided to focus so much on b/c because they think it is what helped Sony in the past. Who knows.

what time investment? sony already has proprietary ps1/psp emulators and there's solid open source ps2 emulators they could incorporate if they don't have their own as well. it's incredibly simple to do, but i cannot for the life of me figure out why sony chose to hold back on classic emulation. it's honestly embarrassing to see ps2 games being played on the xbox

 

[sainraja]

what time investment? sony already has proprietary ps1/psp emulators and there's solid open source ps2 emulators they could incorporate if they don't have their own as well. it's incredibly simple to do, but i cannot for the life of me figure out why sony chose to hold back on classic emulation. it's honestly embarrassing to see ps2 games being played on the xbox

Err, I meant the time we spend with backwards compatible games, meaning the time we actually spend playing them once the gaming library on the 'new' console matures. I do agree with you that we should be able to play PS1/PS2 games we own. I wouldn't say no to having the option to play them.

 

[sainraja]

Technically console is capable:

RPCS3 - Quickstart

Hardware requirements for RPCS3 may vary depending on your system. We cannot guarantee the performance of system specifications below the recommended requirements, but you're welcome to experiment.

rpcs3.net

However another story could be, if someone edit GPU calls to DirectX (from Vulkan), but hopefully does not sounds like too much work, when you have it up and running.


Edit Vulkan calls > DirectX ones? Yeah possibly, but that does not mean you are going to be depended on further development of the software.

No no, I mean, the part where you mentioned how the PS3 emulator isn't quite there and it takes time. I was agreeing that yes it does take work to get it going.

 

[M1chl]

Err, I meant the time we spend with backwards compatible games, meaning the time we actually spend playing them once the gaming library on the 'new' console matures.

Sorry got caught in thoughts, which was for another reaction in this thread. Yeah PS3 emu, no. Otherwise, yeah it's easy. Not sure about state of PS2 emulation (as in how much games can be played from start to finish), but otherwise it looks pretty great honestly.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Sony offered backwards compatibility with the PS2 and PS3. They didn't really do anything to 'prevent' it from succeeding. By offering the feature on two console generations they learned that it wasn't utilized that much once a console had matured with its own library of games (meaning, b/c is a nice to have feature, but usually not the most important.) They ended up sunsetting it on the PS3 due to costs and dropping it altogether on the PS4. They chose to invest money elsewhere after that. This isn't really what needs to be discussed as it has been covered many times.

Also, you might want to go back and re-read what I said. I don't know what Microsoft's actual motivation is in pursuing backwards compatibility but I would be really surprised if they weren't looking at what Sony/Nintendo did in the past to become who they are today. You are welcome to disagree but it was just something I was wondering about, not necessarily saying is the case.

Yeah two years from now nobody will even remember retroarch on xbox was a thing except for a few enthusiasts.
And that's fine, emulation is a niche.

 

[MagnesG]

what time investment? sony already has proprietary ps1/psp emulators and there's solid open source ps2 emulators they could incorporate if they don't have their own as well. it's incredibly simple to do, but i cannot for the life of me figure out why sony chose to hold back on classic emulation. it's honestly embarrassing to see ps2 games being played on the xbox

The same reason Nintendo didn't wanna bother much with old games. New games are still the future.

 

[M1chl]

Not going to lie, I am disappointed that on Video Game forum (not reeee) people are shamed for liking old games. Seems like some people are playing just new games, because they are new.

And no, MS involvement ends with ability to run the unsigned code, emulators are community driven. Sure you can get your PC to emulate games, but not for 300 bucks, with all of the accessories and OS. So I don't get the responses "lol MS, no games".

This sort of thing is not developed by MS and I am making thread so people are aware. Hell MS is probably taking huge loss on console itself, so probably not the PR they want.

Older games matters

*goes back to Quake 3 Arena*

 

[lock2k]

Not going to lie, I am disappointed that on Video Game forum (not reeee) people are shamed for liking old games. Seems like some people are playing just new games, because they are new.

And no, MS involvement ends with ability to run the unsigned code, emulators are community driven. Sure you can get your PC to emulate games, but not for 300 bucks, with all of the accessories and OS. So I don't get the responses "lol MS, no games".

This sort of thing is not developed by MS and I am making thread so people are aware. Hell MS is probably taking huge loss on console itself, so probably not the PR they want.

Older games matters

*goes back to Quake 3 Arena*

 

[MrFunSocks]

And someone in another thread was telling me how it's suppose to be so easy that even "fans" can do it. Yes, it does take time & resources.

Ummm you do know that the only PS3 emulator that we know of is 100% fan made with zero help or inside knowledge from sony and can play a big chunk of PS3 games *perfectly*, don't you? I can play Demon's Souls on my PC at locked 30fps 1080p native flawlessly. I can play the God of War HD and Origins HD Collections at locked 60fps 1080p without a hitch. If a bunch of hobbyists can do that, getting a fully working 100% perfect emulator should be a walk in the park for sony.

Not going to lie, I am disappointed that on Video Game forum (not reeee) people are shamed for liking old games. Seems like some people are playing just new games, because they are new.

And no, MS involvement ends with ability to run the unsigned code, emulators are community driven. Sure you can get your PC to emulate games, but not for 300 bucks, with all of the accessories and OS. So I don't get the responses "lol MS, no games".

This sort of thing is not developed by MS and I am making thread so people are aware. Hell MS is probably taking huge loss on console itself, so probably not the PR they want.

Older games matters

*goes back to Quake 3 Arena*

I think you'll find most of the hardcore team blue people here that have to talk down BC have never played PS2 and earlier games because they weren't old enough to play video games yet when they released.

The games wouldn't be cinematic or linear enough for them anyway

 

[jshackles]

Just for the lols I played a few levels of both Mario 64 and Metal Gear Solid

 

[PSYGN]

Just for the lols I played a few levels of both Mario 64 and Metal Gear Solid

NEOGAF HATES HIM.

For discovering the backwards compatibility trick.

 

[M1chl]

I think you'll find most of the hardcore team blue people here that have to talk down BC have never played PS2 and earlier games because they weren't old enough to play video games yet when they released.

The games wouldn't be cinematic or linear enough for them anyway

I find strange, that these people are mostly same age or older than me. NeoGaf age statistics few months back was really eye-opener...makes me think what did those people played back when they were ugly teenagers? Seems impossible to not get attached to some game. It's not about the game, more like what happened around when you played the game.

And hell playing best Silent Hill which did not received any remake/remaster on Xbox is not a bad thing.

 

[quickwhips]

Not going to lie, I am disappointed that on Video Game forum (not reeee) people are shamed for liking old games. Seems like some people are playing just new games, because they are new.

And no, MS involvement ends with ability to run the unsigned code, emulators are community driven. Sure you can get your PC to emulate games, but not for 300 bucks, with all of the accessories and OS. So I don't get the responses "lol MS, no games".

This sort of thing is not developed by MS and I am making thread so people are aware. Hell MS is probably taking huge loss on console itself, so probably not the PR they want.

Older games matters

*goes back to Quake 3 Arena*

I would spend my life playing swat 4 and quake team fortress and be happy.

 

[fvng]

yes as did the PS4, and theoretically both systems should easily be able to run PS2 and especially PS1 games

The PS2 games on PS4 are actually ported over, not running In emulation. Which is sad since this really reduces the amount of PS2 options on PSN

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Compared to games now yeah. New GoW is 100x better than old GoW. GT7 will be far superior to GT4.

There's plenty of games that are straight shit now compared to how good they used to. Compare any sports game now to then, compare any snowboarding game to SSX Tricky or 3 which I guess is only Steep lmao. Compare any arcade racer you want to Burnout 3 or revenge, compare any skateboard game to TH 3/4/Underground, compare current Star Wars games to Knights of the old Republic/Republic Commando, I could go on and on...

 

[kuncol02]

Compared to games now yeah. New GoW is 100x better than old GoW. GT7 will be far superior to GT4.

GoW is mater of personal taste, bacause that are two totally different games from different genres, but there is no way GT7 will be better than GT4. Not after how shitty current PD output is. I have a friend who was almost crying when he realized how bad GT:Sport is in comparison to Forza Motorsport and old Gran Turismo games. That series is not progressing in quality for 14 years now. It's actually regressing in some areas.

 

[kuncol02]

The PS2 games on PS4 are actually ported over, not running In emulation. Which is sad since this really reduces the amount of PS2 options on PSN

That's not true. It's emulated. On hacked PS4 you can change ISO inside game files and run other games (same way it worked on PS3 and PSP for PSX games), but compatibility is weak.

 

[fvng]

That's not true. It's emulated. On hacked PS4 you can change ISO inside game files and run other games (same way it worked on PS3 and PSP for PSX games), but compatibility is weak.

Interesting, then the information I got was wrong. Then there really is no excuse for more PS2 content on modern PlayStation consoles, they should work on increasing compatibility

 

[YeulEmeralda]

The same reason Nintendo didn't wanna bother much with old games. New games are still the future.

As a company you are competing with emulators that have been around for 15 years and ISOs that can be found with a simple Google search.

Literally nobody is gonna pay €30 for the privilege to play Star Ocean 2 on PS5.

 

[kuncol02]

As a company you are competing with emulators that have been around for 15 years and ISOs that can be found with a simple Google search.

Literally nobody is gonna pay €30 for the privilege to play Star Ocean 2 on PS5.

"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem, {...} If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate's service is more valuable."
-Some smart guy 10 years ago.

 

[INC]

If dev mode still allows this forever, its tempting me to pick up seris S

 

[M1chl]

If dev mode still allows this forever, its tempting me to pick up seris S

I cannot see why not, dev mode is there to stay. Appearantly MS does not even have probelm with retail mode RetroArch, I know it's for limited amount of people but still.

 

[Esppiral]

The PS2 games on PS4 are actually ported over, not running In emulation. Which is sad since this really reduces the amount of PS2 options on PSN

That's false, stop spreading false information, the ps2 classics on PS4 are emulated.

 

[M1chl]

That's false, stop spreading false information, the ps2 classics on PS4 are emulated.

Added achievemnts must be hell with this approach, if you have to somewhat inject handlers for them, for some random thing in game. But if I am not wrong some emulators on PC inject achievements to Mario Bros. Hopefully I don't imagining things.

Oh yeah it exists: https://retroachievements.org/

 

[lock2k]

Added achievemnts must be hell with this approach, if you have to somewhat inject handlers for them, for some random thing in game. But if I am not wrong some emulators on PC inject achievements to Mario Bros. Hopefully I don't imagining things.

Oh yeah it exists: https://retroachievements.org/

Which is neat in a technical way

Spoiler: .

and the dumbest idea ever

 

[M1chl]

Which is neat in a technical way

Spoiler: .

and the dumbest idea ever

I am more reacting to the technical side of things, which I as a dev and IT nerd find interesting.

 

[lock2k]

I am more reacting to the technical side of things, which I as a dev and IT nerd find interesting.

Oh, that I agree with, it's really interesting to implement a modern idea into something that was already coded. I never tried any of these retroachievements, but if they work as intended it's some real clever stuff

It's just that I'm not into modern cheevos/trophies, all of the ones I have were accidental

 

[YeulEmeralda]

That's false, stop spreading false information, the ps2 classics on PS4 are emulated.

They are also shit. Bought Rogue Galaxy: turned out it was English dub only. In the end I played the game on a computer with PCSX2.

 

[The_Mike]

So, Xbox Series X can now play the best god of war while the PS5 can't?