I mean, we can just wait and not buy games at launch/digitally. When you buy physical these days, you can usually lock in a discount before release. I've seen Cyberpunk up for 50$ if you pre-order from Amazon.
In the end, it's why programs like Game Pass are so good, and Sony desperately needs an adequate answer to the program.
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
I mean, we can just wait and not buy games at launch/digitally. When you buy physical these days, you can usually lock in a discount before release. I've seen Cyberpunk up for 50$ if you pre-order from Amazon.
In the end, it's why programs like Game Pass are so good, and Sony desperately needs an adequate answer to the program.
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
Yes and no. Streaming games is still terrible for any games where input lag is important, so any multiplayer games, FPS games or fighting games are gonna feel sluggish, even on the best connections, because Sony's servers aren't the best. Not to mention the layout is supremely confusing and densely packed with games, without much curation. Sure it's a value, but one that doesn't compare to what Game Pass does at all. Game Pass let's you download the whole game, play it as intended, transfer the saves to full games should you chose to buy them, the Backwards compatible games are much better and enhanced on Xbox compared to the frankly pretty bad PS2 emulator they use.
In the end, different strokes for different folks, but Game Pass is a much better value if you care about first party titles, the curated experience is better than just tossing FUCKLOAD OF JRPGS GO NUTS KIDS at you
I mean, we can just wait and not buy games at launch/digitally. When you buy physical these days, you can usually lock in a discount before release. I've seen Cyberpunk up for 50$ if you pre-order from Amazon.
In the end, it's why programs like Game Pass are so good, and Sony desperately needs an adequate answer to the program.
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
The other big bonus for Gamepass is the number of studios Microsoft have bought in the last few years.
The Outer Worlds and Wasteland 3 would have been day one purchases for me, and Microsoft bought both studios.
The combined cost for both games is a years worth of Gamepass, so any other games I download and play in the same period is a bonus, and there have been quite a few. I’m currently playing Witcher Tales Thronebreaker, which came to Gamepass recently, which I had my eye on for a while.
All other considerations aside, Gamepass alone makes a disk-less console a solid prospect.
To the point where I’m now seriously reconsidering getting a Series X and maybe instead getting a series S and a PS5.
Series S for Gamepass and multiplatform games, and the PS5 for the exclusives.
I can live without 4K 60fps on Cyberpunk if I can also play Last of Us 2 and Horizon 2.
I mean, we can just wait and not buy games at launch/digitally. When you buy physical these days, you can usually lock in a discount before release. I've seen Cyberpunk up for 50$ if you pre-order from Amazon.
In the end, it's why programs like Game Pass are so good, and Sony desperately needs an adequate answer to the program.
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
The other big bonus for Gamepass is the number of studios Microsoft have bought in the last few years.
The Outer Worlds and Wasteland 3 would have been day one purchases for me, and Microsoft bought both studios.
The combined cost for both games is a years worth of Gamepass, so any other games I download and play in the same period is a bonus, and there have been quite a few. I’m currently playing Witcher Tales Thronebreaker, which came to Gamepass recently, which I had my eye on for a while.
All other considerations aside, Gamepass alone makes a disk-less console a solid prospect.
To the point where I’m now seriously reconsidering getting a Series X and maybe instead getting a series S and a PS5.
Series S for Gamepass and multiplatform games, and the PS5 for the exclusives.
I can live without 4K 60fps on Cyberpunk if I can also play Last of Us 2 and Horizon 2.
I’m not saying Game Pass isn’t the better service, it definitively is. I’m just saying that Now is actually a solid service now and with some tweaks it could be a serious competitor next gen.
Also if you had a PS5 and a series S (assuming rumors are true) why wouldn’t you buy the multiplatform titles on the 5 and get the better version if the prices are the same? I can understand if it was a title on Game Pass, but if you had to buy it either way why not get the better one?
I mean, we can just wait and not buy games at launch/digitally. When you buy physical these days, you can usually lock in a discount before release. I've seen Cyberpunk up for 50$ if you pre-order from Amazon.
In the end, it's why programs like Game Pass are so good, and Sony desperately needs an adequate answer to the program.
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
The other big bonus for Gamepass is the number of studios Microsoft have bought in the last few years.
The Outer Worlds and Wasteland 3 would have been day one purchases for me, and Microsoft bought both studios.
The combined cost for both games is a years worth of Gamepass, so any other games I download and play in the same period is a bonus, and there have been quite a few. I’m currently playing Witcher Tales Thronebreaker, which came to Gamepass recently, which I had my eye on for a while.
All other considerations aside, Gamepass alone makes a disk-less console a solid prospect.
To the point where I’m now seriously reconsidering getting a Series X and maybe instead getting a series S and a PS5.
Series S for Gamepass and multiplatform games, and the PS5 for the exclusives.
I can live without 4K 60fps on Cyberpunk if I can also play Last of Us 2 and Horizon 2.
I’m not saying Game Pass isn’t the better service, it definitively is. I’m just saying that Now is actually a solid service now and with some tweaks it could be a serious competitor next gen.
Also if you had a PS5 and a series S (assuming rumors are true) why wouldn’t you buy the multiplatform titles on the 5 and get the better version if the prices are the same? I can understand if it was a title on Game Pass, but if you had to buy it either way why not get the better one?
I’m oddly addicted to gamer score - for me, trophies were never as desirable. Plus I rarely platinum’d a game, so I’d be happy with 950/1000 Gs for getting every achievement other that beating the game on super tough mode, but would be annoyed for getting the same on PlayStation, but missing out on a gold and platinum trophy.
Plus I literally can’t tell the difference between 4K and not quite 4K, so the extra pixels, or 5 FPS here and there doesn’t bother me.
Another thing being that Microsoft has a better history with backwards compatible stuff, and isn't as liable to drop support as Sony has done for the feature in the past. Seeing nearly my entire 360 library ready to go on One X is pretty nuts.
Another thing being that Microsoft has a better history with backwards compatible stuff, and isn't as liable to drop support as Sony has done for the feature in the past. Seeing nearly my entire 360 library ready to go on One X is pretty nuts.
Microsoft has certainly turned my opinion of them the further we went through this generation.
Another thing being that Microsoft has a better history with backwards compatible stuff, and isn't as liable to drop support as Sony has done for the feature in the past. Seeing nearly my entire 360 library ready to go on One X is pretty nuts.
Microsoft has certainly turned my opinion of them the further we went through this generation.
I recently watched Digital Foundry’s retrospective of the Xbox One launch and thought “Oh, this was worse than I remembered.” And I think I got to the point where I remembered thinking “Hmmm - guess I’m going with the PS4 for this generation.”
It was if the Xbox reveal was specifically designed by someone at Sony to sell as many PS4s as possible.
“Damn, nearly forgot to put in the part about killing the pre-owned game market !”
Just awful.
+3
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited July 2020
But it's fine, for people who don't have the internet we have a product for them - it's called the Xbox 360.
Edit: Ironically for how angry I was at Microsoft at the time, I only got a PS4 just a month or so ago. Mostly because I changed all of my gaming from Xbox 360 to the PS3/Vita at the time. God I loved the vita.
With respects to talks about All-Encompassing BC, I guess folks are letting themselves get hot and bothered over revisions to old PSNow patents discussing digital libraries for PS1-PS5 played via "virtualized operating systems". (I guess "emulation" isn't sufficiently specific when filing patents?)
As much as I hate it, because I am one of those people, from a business point of view I am sure Sony has done the math. Even if people like me are pretty common in the states we still make up a small percentage of the overall purchasers. Of course Sony could say fuck that we want all of our fans to enjoy our products, but that is not really their mo.
They did the math when taking BC chips out of PS3's the first time, obviously most consumers don't care about BC mostly just hardcore fans. Still, lame to advertise BC as a feature of the console, when it's not -really- moreover just a service Sony is looking to add to PSN I imagine
With respects to talks about All-Encompassing BC, I guess folks are letting themselves get hot and bothered over revisions to old PSNow patents discussing digital libraries for PS1-PS5 played via "virtualized operating systems". (I guess "emulation" isn't sufficiently specific when filing patents?)
My guess, with regards to the strange wording, is that you can't emulate a PS4 game as a stand alone executable. There are too many hooks into the operating system. So Sony will actually be doing something closer to a virtual machine rather then what we think of when talking about emulation. Of course I could be way off base and they just needed to be that specific.
The tweet and the diagram are specifically PS1, PS2, and PS3. I doubt patent language is necessarily as strict on drawing a line between VMs and Emulation, technically the former is capable of including the latter.
The first rumors about full BC were specifically about holding onto your discs. I wonder if Sony might be looking into some kind of disc-based access option to specific cloud games, analogous to how Microsoft has been handling discs in their BC as authorization to download. Or more likely someone just got too excited when they saw hints that Sony was developing new emulators that would just end up on PSNow servers.
rahkeesh2000 on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I think it's less that Sony doesn't care about rural areas etc, because they're still going with a disc drive in the PS5 and more that they don't think BC is as big a marketing deal/impetus as new exclusive games are. Whatever solution is the cheapest, even if it's not universal, probably suits them fine.
They did the math when taking BC chips out of PS3's the first time, obviously most consumers don't care about BC mostly just hardcore fans. Still, lame to advertise BC as a feature of the console, when it's not -really- moreover just a service Sony is looking to add to PSN I imagine
The math from manufacturing what is essentially a whole-ass PlayStation 2 within the PlayStation 3 is wildly different by several orders of magnitude, from the math of having a team develop a virtual machine emulator
Whether or not the difference is enough to change their philosophy is questionable but it's like comparing apples to pineapples
This is not that complicated. Take a PS1 console, PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5. Strip all of the outer plastic so that you have five sets of components connected to five motherboards. Unplug some of the wires and plug them into the other motherboards so that they are all connected and can talk to each other. Design a reasonably sized box that can house all of it - can't be much bigger than the PS5 already looks to be - and add some great fans. Attach a 65" foldout flatscreen TV to it. Add wheels and a steering wheel. Add a hinged door so that the enormous, necessary, and effective cooling system can also double as a mini-fridge. Pack a gamer chair in the box for value and charge $500 for it. DONE. Jeez.
They did the math when taking BC chips out of PS3's the first time, obviously most consumers don't care about BC mostly just hardcore fans. Still, lame to advertise BC as a feature of the console, when it's not -really- moreover just a service Sony is looking to add to PSN I imagine
The math from manufacturing what is essentially a whole-ass PlayStation 2 within the PlayStation 3 is wildly different by several orders of magnitude, from the math of having a team develop a virtual machine emulator
Whether or not the difference is enough to change their philosophy is questionable but it's like comparing apples to pineapples
Maybe, but as a potential customer the end result is a pattern forming where BC isn't a priority to them. And as someone who actually has a small assload of physical games in storage I usually can't play without a complicated and potentially expensive setup, it is a selling point to be able to just pop the games in and use them... I understand that's probably how PS4 games will work, and that's good. It's not hard to offer BC (well, for the PS1 and 2, 3 is prob another thing entirely). Even MS's approach isn't perfect, the offering of oXbox titles leaves a lot to be desired. But the method they use is pretty good, in fact often straight up improving the games in question and enabling 4K upscaling. A streamed game just not compare to that.
I'm pretty much all in on getting both major consoles, but I'd like more feature parity. I want better BC, better download speeds and better UI from Sony, and I want better first party titles, Bluetooth support and better UI from MS. It's cool to call them out on areas where they can improve and so far, there's not a lot of love about Sony's track record with BC and how they're potentially handling it going forward.
This is not that complicated. Take a PS1 console, PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5. Strip all of the outer plastic so that you have five sets of components connected to five motherboards. Unplug some of the wires and plug them into the other motherboards so that they are all connected and can talk to each other. Design a reasonably sized box that can house all of it - can't be much bigger than the PS5 already looks to be - and add some great fans. Attach a 65" foldout flatscreen TV to it. Add wheels and a steering wheel. Add a hinged door so that the enormous, necessary, and effective cooling system can also double as a mini-fridge. Pack a gamer chair in the box for value and charge $500 for it. DONE. Jeez.
How many GameCubes is that, roughly, duct tape included?
They did the math when taking BC chips out of PS3's the first time, obviously most consumers don't care about BC mostly just hardcore fans. Still, lame to advertise BC as a feature of the console, when it's not -really- moreover just a service Sony is looking to add to PSN I imagine
The math from manufacturing what is essentially a whole-ass PlayStation 2 within the PlayStation 3 is wildly different by several orders of magnitude, from the math of having a team develop a virtual machine emulator
Whether or not the difference is enough to change their philosophy is questionable but it's like comparing apples to pineapples
Except they also dropped software backwards compatibility, something they'd already paid the development for. So it wasn't just about "a whole PlayStation 2 inside a PlayStation 3", because even after Sony got rid of that, it still was still too much for the console that did everything*. It was also about not wanting to pay whatever licenses Sony was obligated to in order to have a working software BC model (to give Sony credit) and the fact that Sony very clearly wanted to resell as many PS2 games to their customer base while losing none of that profit to annoyances like the second-hand market or existing libraries (to give them less credit), weighing the customer ire versus the profit potential, and immediately getting dollar signs in their eyes. A very typically Sony thing to do--part of me was surprised they didn't do the same with PlayStation 1 compatibility, but then again that got axed with the PS4 launch so eventually they did in a sense.
This isn't some terrible atrocity. Microsoft removed native Kinect device support from the first major Xbox One console revision (albeit with a better excuse--removal of a unique, high-power modded USB port allowed for smaller console with an internal PSU), thereby requiring users to buy breakout boxes (after initially supplying them for free)...then they retired the device entirely (it only lives on in educational and scientific applications, pretty much completely divorced from the actual video game console). Both manufacturers dropped optical out from their consoles, Sony doing it first. Features get removed. Features like "Support for a library of hundreds of video games" getting removed is a good bit more notable for "a console that plays video games" for obvious reasons. You can still play Kinect games on an Xbox One, because they didn't adopt Sony's "salt the Earth" approach, they just let it die slowly.
Of course, if you don't give a shit about BC, none of this matters. That's video games more generally (the sub-4% attach rate of PSVR has pretty clearly established that the vast majority of PlayStation 4 owners...never use PSVR, the same way most never use BC either, even if the cost entry barrier is much lower). Customers like myself, who bought a PlayStation 3 expressly for the reason of playing PS2 titles because that hardware had a checkered reliability history are clearly in the minority. Most owners can easily identify how it affects the broadest value of the console, even if they never use it, the same way most PS4 users can easily identify the broadest value PSVR gives the platform, even if most of them never use it.
Personally, I would be mildly worried about Sony's low interest in backwards compatibility more generally, as it relates directly to their whole approach of "Gaikai is now PSNow and is going to change the world, except 3 years ago we killed support for the majority of platforms it was on, because who on Earth actually owns a PS3, a Vita, or a Sony television, amirite?" as the crux of that program. PSNow is, in fact, better than it was when it launched (because it was terrible when it launched). Sony has also tried to kill it at least once for whatever business reasons entered their mind. Ask yourself: what if Project XCloud, after leaving beta and becoming a paid service on Xbox One, Xbox 360, Windows, Televisions and Smartphones, announced more than half of those platforms were no longer be supported? We'd think Microsoft was killing it, and no one could blame our suspicions. Especially if it clearly pained Xbox to actually have to talk about it. This is basically a foundation of sand to build BC on. Could Sony turn it around? Maybe, if they gave a shit?
What do they give a shit about? Well, PS4 support, which me and everyone else agrees should be the highest priority of their backwards compatibility mission. That's a good thing. And given Sony's history, it's believable that they'd put their efforts into something they consider important (support for a very recent console platform), and a lot less into something else that is a lot less important. Does having that support add value to a PlayStation 5, even though not only is it easier for the average person to buy a PS4 than a PS2, the hardware is vastly more reliable? I'm pretty sure it does, even if not every single person would use it.
On a side note, I don't know if this is my office browser or just an unseen update to the forums, but "PlayStation" is auto-corrected to have two capital letters. Neato.
"software" backwards-compatible PS3 units still relied on some PS2 hardware components. Dropping those in later revisions is what killed it off. Select titles were still available in pure software emulation on PSN.
For most companies full BC is only really useful at launch, when the new system's library is very thin. Nintendo's shown a similar pattern of coming out of the gate with full BC for the previous gen when the architecture is similar, and gradually dropping it over revisions. Even when the internal hardware is still fully present and accessible to hackers, they make it officially inaccessible by just removing the external ports/slots.
In that respect whatever Microsoft is doing is pretty different. In theory its more about reselling old games, which in principle isn't any different from Nintendo's virtual console or Sony PS Classics. However it has the wrinkle that MS is willing to earn goodwill by letting you use old discs as well. I only see them doing that because they are the underdog, as to whatever degree Sony or Nintendo is willing to revive old games, it would cost you something.
"software" backwards-compatible PS3 units still relied on some PS2 hardware components. Dropping those in later revisions is what killed it off. Select titles were still available in pure software emulation on PSN.
Yes, but it's pretty misleading to call that "an entire-ass PlayStation 2 inside your PlayStation 3." Its removal also has the same practical consequence either way.
This is not that complicated. Take a PS1 console, PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5. Strip all of the outer plastic so that you have five sets of components connected to five motherboards. Unplug some of the wires and plug them into the other motherboards so that they are all connected and can talk to each other. Design a reasonably sized box that can house all of it - can't be much bigger than the PS5 already looks to be - and add some great fans. Attach a 65" foldout flatscreen TV to it. Add wheels and a steering wheel. Add a hinged door so that the enormous, necessary, and effective cooling system can also double as a mini-fridge. Pack a gamer chair in the box for value and charge $500 for it. DONE. Jeez.
Nintendo is a poor example I think, because unlike Sony/MS they have a rather large stable of quality titles across 40 years to offer, and people are willing to pay a premium for them because like Disney, Apple and other companies, they intentional make things scarce or at least not easily accessible so they can get away charging a premium when they feel like dropping them again. Like the SNES classic being a smash hit while the PS Classic was a big flop, the nostalgia for Nintendo just hits stronger. Nintendo absolutely could make a killing with a good eShop stocked with a library of their games (and they did that eventually on the Wii/WiiU) but Nintendo doesn't have to do that, in fact making their BC releases few and far between builds hype. If Nintendo ever gets in hot water? Quick, drop Mother 3!
Nintendo is a poor example I think, because unlike Sony/MS they have a rather large stable of quality titles across 40 years to offer, and people are willing to pay a premium for them because like Disney, Apple and other companies, they intentional make things scarce or at least not easily accessible so they can get away charging a premium when they feel like dropping them again. Like the SNES classic being a smash hit while the PS Classic was a big flop, the nostalgia for Nintendo just hits stronger. Nintendo absolutely could make a killing with a good eShop stocked with a library of their games (and they did that eventually on the Wii/WiiU) but Nintendo doesn't have to do that, in fact making their BC releases few and far between builds hype. If Nintendo ever gets in hot water? Quick, drop Mother 3!
Can we hurry and put them in hot water then! I want Mother 3.
It's not undeserved--not to say anyone was suggesting it was, though nostalgia and sentiment aren't universal (my own personal desire to revisit Nintendo's past library tends to not involve their actual first-party titles, which is why I only own a SNES Mini because I can hack the hell out of it), Nintendo has clearly put a lot of effort into fostering it actively controlling accessibility to it a manner that fits with their business model. Companies only have so much resources to go around, look at how the Wii U's "third-party support initiative" played out years ago, or the current state of Nintendo's online infrastructure in 2020. Obviously it works out for them, but their priorities are pretty obvious.
I realized today that I don't really care if there are no games I want for the PS5 on launch - I'm going to get it day 1 anyway. My OG PS4 has served me like a tank since release, with its loud-assed fan and all, and I'll honor it by burying it next to its kin. I'll just use the PS5 as my streaming box, which is largely what I use the 4 for these days. Weird times, man.
I'm going to get one ASAP as a PS4 replacement (also for Spider-Man:MM and Hitman 3 at the very least), but I'm going to keep my PS4 in a closet somewhere, just in case.
Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
+1
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
The second those pre-orders go up I'll be placing mine.
There's already multiple launch games I want and honestly just playing CP2077 on it is reason enough.
I do keep finding myself wondering if MonHun World will run at launch. Not for any particular reason beyond I guess the SSD, since it makes such a difference on PC.
So guess I'm in the "here for the upgrade on ps4 regardless" camp too.
I do keep finding myself wondering if MonHun World will run at launch. Not for any particular reason beyond I guess the SSD, since it makes such a difference on PC.
So guess I'm in the "here for the upgrade on ps4 regardless" camp too.
My sense is that Capcom plans to keep supporting World, and it's fairly recent title, so I'd surprised if it wasn't one of the initial guaranteed "boosted PS4" titles.
My plan was to trade in my PS4Pro for the PS5 if there's a decent deal at launch.
Except now I've just won a second PSVR set in a competition, and my wife realized at game nights we could have people playing Beat Saber side by side (at a safe distance) if we keep the PS4.
Also it has a Disney+ app which the PS3 we currently use as the streaming box in the room she does jigsaws in does not, so it kinda makes sense.
Switch Friend Code: SW-3944-9431-0318
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
2 things - I am sad I clicked on a thread that said "launch lineup revealed" and did not find a convenient list of titles available at launch.
I'm willing to give it a whirl. (Cracks ancient, wizened knuckles.)
Spider-Man: Miles Morales
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Cyberpunk 2077
Ghost of Tsushima (launches in July, thus must be forward compatible and it's first-party, so...)
Godfall - meh
Cris Tales
Watch Dogs Legion too, I guess. At launch for first party it's only SM:MM, I think. Cyberpunk launches on Nov 19th, not 17th, so I'm pretty sure there'll just be a PS5 version you can buy right at launch.
Damn I thought R&C was launch. Totally forgot about Spider Man >.<
Chance on
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Cyberpunk won't have a separate PS5/XSX version, it's just the current gen version. They'll release a next gen enhancing patch at a later date.
I know, it's just effectively. I won't have to start playing it on my Pro and go through the hassle of transferring to the ps5. Just launch - let's roll, PS5.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
Posts
Sony has PSNow. Which despite it being kinda bad at launch is actually a pretty solid service now.
All of the PS4 and ps2 games are fully downloadable to the console to play and the PS3 library is streamable. On PC you just stream everything.
They don’t really do the whole day 1 on Now thing that Gamepass does, but It’s got a really good library especially considering it’s only $60 for the year.
Yes and no. Streaming games is still terrible for any games where input lag is important, so any multiplayer games, FPS games or fighting games are gonna feel sluggish, even on the best connections, because Sony's servers aren't the best. Not to mention the layout is supremely confusing and densely packed with games, without much curation. Sure it's a value, but one that doesn't compare to what Game Pass does at all. Game Pass let's you download the whole game, play it as intended, transfer the saves to full games should you chose to buy them, the Backwards compatible games are much better and enhanced on Xbox compared to the frankly pretty bad PS2 emulator they use.
In the end, different strokes for different folks, but Game Pass is a much better value if you care about first party titles, the curated experience is better than just tossing FUCKLOAD OF JRPGS GO NUTS KIDS at you
The other big bonus for Gamepass is the number of studios Microsoft have bought in the last few years.
The Outer Worlds and Wasteland 3 would have been day one purchases for me, and Microsoft bought both studios.
The combined cost for both games is a years worth of Gamepass, so any other games I download and play in the same period is a bonus, and there have been quite a few. I’m currently playing Witcher Tales Thronebreaker, which came to Gamepass recently, which I had my eye on for a while.
All other considerations aside, Gamepass alone makes a disk-less console a solid prospect.
To the point where I’m now seriously reconsidering getting a Series X and maybe instead getting a series S and a PS5.
Series S for Gamepass and multiplatform games, and the PS5 for the exclusives.
I can live without 4K 60fps on Cyberpunk if I can also play Last of Us 2 and Horizon 2.
I’m not saying Game Pass isn’t the better service, it definitively is. I’m just saying that Now is actually a solid service now and with some tweaks it could be a serious competitor next gen.
Also if you had a PS5 and a series S (assuming rumors are true) why wouldn’t you buy the multiplatform titles on the 5 and get the better version if the prices are the same? I can understand if it was a title on Game Pass, but if you had to buy it either way why not get the better one?
I’m oddly addicted to gamer score - for me, trophies were never as desirable. Plus I rarely platinum’d a game, so I’d be happy with 950/1000 Gs for getting every achievement other that beating the game on super tough mode, but would be annoyed for getting the same on PlayStation, but missing out on a gold and platinum trophy.
Plus I literally can’t tell the difference between 4K and not quite 4K, so the extra pixels, or 5 FPS here and there doesn’t bother me.
Microsoft has certainly turned my opinion of them the further we went through this generation.
I recently watched Digital Foundry’s retrospective of the Xbox One launch and thought “Oh, this was worse than I remembered.” And I think I got to the point where I remembered thinking “Hmmm - guess I’m going with the PS4 for this generation.”
It was if the Xbox reveal was specifically designed by someone at Sony to sell as many PS4s as possible.
“Damn, nearly forgot to put in the part about killing the pre-owned game market !”
Just awful.
Edit: Ironically for how angry I was at Microsoft at the time, I only got a PS4 just a month or so ago. Mostly because I changed all of my gaming from Xbox 360 to the PS3/Vita at the time. God I loved the vita.
IGN has a write-up here.
PSN:Furlion
My guess, with regards to the strange wording, is that you can't emulate a PS4 game as a stand alone executable. There are too many hooks into the operating system. So Sony will actually be doing something closer to a virtual machine rather then what we think of when talking about emulation. Of course I could be way off base and they just needed to be that specific.
PSN:Furlion
The first rumors about full BC were specifically about holding onto your discs. I wonder if Sony might be looking into some kind of disc-based access option to specific cloud games, analogous to how Microsoft has been handling discs in their BC as authorization to download. Or more likely someone just got too excited when they saw hints that Sony was developing new emulators that would just end up on PSNow servers.
The math from manufacturing what is essentially a whole-ass PlayStation 2 within the PlayStation 3 is wildly different by several orders of magnitude, from the math of having a team develop a virtual machine emulator
Whether or not the difference is enough to change their philosophy is questionable but it's like comparing apples to pineapples
Maybe, but as a potential customer the end result is a pattern forming where BC isn't a priority to them. And as someone who actually has a small assload of physical games in storage I usually can't play without a complicated and potentially expensive setup, it is a selling point to be able to just pop the games in and use them... I understand that's probably how PS4 games will work, and that's good. It's not hard to offer BC (well, for the PS1 and 2, 3 is prob another thing entirely). Even MS's approach isn't perfect, the offering of oXbox titles leaves a lot to be desired. But the method they use is pretty good, in fact often straight up improving the games in question and enabling 4K upscaling. A streamed game just not compare to that.
I'm pretty much all in on getting both major consoles, but I'd like more feature parity. I want better BC, better download speeds and better UI from Sony, and I want better first party titles, Bluetooth support and better UI from MS. It's cool to call them out on areas where they can improve and so far, there's not a lot of love about Sony's track record with BC and how they're potentially handling it going forward.
How many GameCubes is that, roughly, duct tape included?
PSN:Furlion
Except they also dropped software backwards compatibility, something they'd already paid the development for. So it wasn't just about "a whole PlayStation 2 inside a PlayStation 3", because even after Sony got rid of that, it still was still too much for the console that did everything*. It was also about not wanting to pay whatever licenses Sony was obligated to in order to have a working software BC model (to give Sony credit) and the fact that Sony very clearly wanted to resell as many PS2 games to their customer base while losing none of that profit to annoyances like the second-hand market or existing libraries (to give them less credit), weighing the customer ire versus the profit potential, and immediately getting dollar signs in their eyes. A very typically Sony thing to do--part of me was surprised they didn't do the same with PlayStation 1 compatibility, but then again that got axed with the PS4 launch so eventually they did in a sense.
This isn't some terrible atrocity. Microsoft removed native Kinect device support from the first major Xbox One console revision (albeit with a better excuse--removal of a unique, high-power modded USB port allowed for smaller console with an internal PSU), thereby requiring users to buy breakout boxes (after initially supplying them for free)...then they retired the device entirely (it only lives on in educational and scientific applications, pretty much completely divorced from the actual video game console). Both manufacturers dropped optical out from their consoles, Sony doing it first. Features get removed. Features like "Support for a library of hundreds of video games" getting removed is a good bit more notable for "a console that plays video games" for obvious reasons. You can still play Kinect games on an Xbox One, because they didn't adopt Sony's "salt the Earth" approach, they just let it die slowly.
Of course, if you don't give a shit about BC, none of this matters. That's video games more generally (the sub-4% attach rate of PSVR has pretty clearly established that the vast majority of PlayStation 4 owners...never use PSVR, the same way most never use BC either, even if the cost entry barrier is much lower). Customers like myself, who bought a PlayStation 3 expressly for the reason of playing PS2 titles because that hardware had a checkered reliability history are clearly in the minority. Most owners can easily identify how it affects the broadest value of the console, even if they never use it, the same way most PS4 users can easily identify the broadest value PSVR gives the platform, even if most of them never use it.
Personally, I would be mildly worried about Sony's low interest in backwards compatibility more generally, as it relates directly to their whole approach of "Gaikai is now PSNow and is going to change the world, except 3 years ago we killed support for the majority of platforms it was on, because who on Earth actually owns a PS3, a Vita, or a Sony television, amirite?" as the crux of that program. PSNow is, in fact, better than it was when it launched (because it was terrible when it launched). Sony has also tried to kill it at least once for whatever business reasons entered their mind. Ask yourself: what if Project XCloud, after leaving beta and becoming a paid service on Xbox One, Xbox 360, Windows, Televisions and Smartphones, announced more than half of those platforms were no longer be supported? We'd think Microsoft was killing it, and no one could blame our suspicions. Especially if it clearly pained Xbox to actually have to talk about it. This is basically a foundation of sand to build BC on. Could Sony turn it around? Maybe, if they gave a shit?
What do they give a shit about? Well, PS4 support, which me and everyone else agrees should be the highest priority of their backwards compatibility mission. That's a good thing. And given Sony's history, it's believable that they'd put their efforts into something they consider important (support for a very recent console platform), and a lot less into something else that is a lot less important. Does having that support add value to a PlayStation 5, even though not only is it easier for the average person to buy a PS4 than a PS2, the hardware is vastly more reliable? I'm pretty sure it does, even if not every single person would use it.
On a side note, I don't know if this is my office browser or just an unseen update to the forums, but "PlayStation" is auto-corrected to have two capital letters. Neato.
For most companies full BC is only really useful at launch, when the new system's library is very thin. Nintendo's shown a similar pattern of coming out of the gate with full BC for the previous gen when the architecture is similar, and gradually dropping it over revisions. Even when the internal hardware is still fully present and accessible to hackers, they make it officially inaccessible by just removing the external ports/slots.
In that respect whatever Microsoft is doing is pretty different. In theory its more about reselling old games, which in principle isn't any different from Nintendo's virtual console or Sony PS Classics. However it has the wrinkle that MS is willing to earn goodwill by letting you use old discs as well. I only see them doing that because they are the underdog, as to whatever degree Sony or Nintendo is willing to revive old games, it would cost you something.
Yes, but it's pretty misleading to call that "an entire-ass PlayStation 2 inside your PlayStation 3." Its removal also has the same practical consequence either way.
And we shall call it...The Homer
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Can we hurry and put them in hot water then! I want Mother 3.
There's already multiple launch games I want and honestly just playing CP2077 on it is reason enough.
So guess I'm in the "here for the upgrade on ps4 regardless" camp too.
My sense is that Capcom plans to keep supporting World, and it's fairly recent title, so I'd surprised if it wasn't one of the initial guaranteed "boosted PS4" titles.
Except now I've just won a second PSVR set in a competition, and my wife realized at game nights we could have people playing Beat Saber side by side (at a safe distance) if we keep the PS4.
Also it has a Disney+ app which the PS3 we currently use as the streaming box in the room she does jigsaws in does not, so it kinda makes sense.
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
I'm willing to give it a whirl. (Cracks ancient, wizened knuckles.)
Watch Dogs Legion too, I guess. At launch for first party it's only SM:MM, I think. Cyberpunk launches on Nov 19th, not 17th, so I'm pretty sure there'll just be a PS5 version you can buy right at launch.
Damn I thought R&C was launch. Totally forgot about Spider Man >.<
https://www.cyberpunk.net/en/news/35449/cyberpunk-2077-next-gen-consoles-compatibility
I know, it's just effectively. I won't have to start playing it on my Pro and go through the hassle of transferring to the ps5. Just launch - let's roll, PS5.
It's not, they've said 2021.