How do you think Backwards Compatibility will be gimped next gen?

[Deleted member 49611]

I reckon BC will work no problem. Games will run on next gen just as they did on current gen.

There will be improved graphics/performance but you still need to pay for them. You can't charge for patches but you can charge for DLC. What's stopping studios locking improvements behind DLC that you need to buy separately in the store?

Instead of buying a remaster copy or waiting for a patch that takes advantage of the new hardware you need to buy it as DLC. I don't see how it would work any other way since nobody is gonna ask you to buy a game twice. I mean say you bought a physical copy of Cyberpunk 2077 for PS4 and you use it for your PS5. It'd be stupid to go out and buy a new disc just for PS5. Also, again, you can't charge for patches.

They'll just release a "Assets & Performance Upgrade" DLC option in the store. That's how they'll give you BC + still get money out of you.

that said...i would love if it was just a free patch but i can't see them passing up on all that money. I mean for example look how much money Rockstar made from tempting people to double dip on GTA V for PS3/PS4. Nah...they'll find some way to charge you money.

 

[Remo Williams]

Both are BC enhancements put in to new game box and sold for full price. Literally they are not different from Red Dead Redemption patch they did with Xbox One X.

Click to shrink...

No. Gears of War: Ultimate Edition is not a remaster, it's a remake, so think Shadow of the Colossus PS4, not Shadow of the Colossus PS3.

Halo Wars: Definitive Edition is a remaster. However, it's a port, not a BC release, and it was not sold "for full price". It launched as a part of Halo Wars 2: Ultimate Edition, and later it was made available separately for $20. The original game was $60.

BC enhancements were never meant to eliminate commercial remasters, there are games that exist in both forms. Good guy Microsoft did not make Halo Wars: Definitive Edition available to owners of Halo Wars for free, that's true. They only did it with enhancements to Kameo: Elements of Power, Perfect Dark, Perfect Dark Zero, Viva Pinata, Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise, Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie , Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts, Crackdown, Halo 3, Fable Anniversary, Fable 2, Fable 3, Ninja Gaiden 2, Forza Horizon, Gears of War 2, and Gears of War 3 (EDIT: Sorry, I forgot about Conker: Live & Reloaded, Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge, Blinx, Jade Empire, Fusion Frenzy, and Grabbed by the Ghoulies). That's in addition to giving away full versions of Phantom Dust, Crackdown, Crackdown 2, Too Human, and Lost Odyssey for free (the last one only for a limited time). Good guy Microsoft indeed.

 

[Fisty]

I reckon BC will work no problem. Games will run on next gen just as they did on current gen.

There will be improved graphics/performance but you still need to pay for them. You can't charge for patches but you can charge for DLC. What's stopping studios locking improvements behind DLC that you need to buy separately in the store?

Instead of buying a remaster copy or waiting for a patch that takes advantage of the new hardware you need to buy it as DLC. I don't see how it would work any other way since nobody is gonna ask you to buy a game twice. I mean say you bought a physical copy of Cyberpunk 2077 for PS4 and you use it for your PS5. It'd be stupid to go out and buy a new disc just for PS5. Also, again, you can't charge for patches.

They'll just release a "Assets & Performance Upgrade" DLC option in the store. That's how they'll give you BC + still get money out of you.

that said...i would love if it was just a free patch but i can't see them passing up on all that money. I mean for example look how much money Rockstar made from tempting people to double dip on GTA V for PS3/PS4. Nah...they'll find some way to charge you money.

Click to shrink...

There is already a rule, at least with Sony, where devs cant charge for upgrade patches

 

[Deleted member 49611]

There is already a rule, at least with Sony, where devs cant charge for upgrade patches

Click to shrink...

yeah i know. that's what i said in my post.

 

[Fisty]

yeah i know. that's what i said in my post.

Click to shrink...

Yes but they cant just "sneak" an enhancement patch into DLC, it doesnt work that way

 

[MilesQ]

I expect MS to pull off some magic with BC, especially for earlier X1 titles that struggled to hit 1080p. I fully expect Sony to at least get to parity with what MS has been doing this gen. I don't want to repurchase PS1/PS2/PS3 games, let us put the disc in and download the updated ISO with whatever upgrades the emulator adds.

 

[gebler]

I dont think people will stand for those type of remasters, honestly. If the PS4 version already works out of the box on PS5, and the devs can still get in the original game code to make a remaster, why wouldnt they just add support for the new hardware to the existing game? Most of the dev effort behind current Remasters is getting the game to actually run on new hardware. If that's not the case, and the enhancements just end up being a res bump, faster loading and maybe framerate unlock... how is that worth money?

Click to shrink...

Lots of people care a great deal about higher resolutions, faster loading and higher frame rates, so of course it's worth money. Or should be. Lower costs are not the same as no costs. Any global change to a game means there is a risk that things can break, so you need a full QA cycle, fix bugs that were discovered there, a new QA cycle to catch regressions, certification, etc. And people working on it could be working on more profitable things instead, so there is an opportunity cost that can be difficult to appreciate from the outside. Why take those costs if it provides so little benefit that people like you question whether it's "worth money" at all? You are essentially being generous with other people's money.

Nobody paid a dime for PS4 Pro enhancements, it should be the same here

Click to shrink...

Paid PS4 Pro enhancements were not allowed by Sony, neither in the form of a paid patches nor in the form of PS4 Pro-only games. So of course nobody paid a dime. But there will definitely be PS5-only games, opening up a way to sell enhancements that simply didn't exist for the PS4/PS4 Pro. Bloodborne never received a PS4 Pro patch, presumably because it wouldn't have paid for itself. If a 4K/60 version of Bloodborne for the PS5 is released, do you really think it wouldn't sell?

 

[Replicant]

I think the only thing that will gimp BC going forward is how MS handled it - selective titles based on publisher approval. Which kinda sucks, because I just want to put in a disc I own and play it on modern hardware.

Click to shrink...

Well in MS's clase that would be the only way this past gen as the games needed to be emulated. That and licensing, if they wanted to continue selling the game in the store.

Next gen backwards compatibility should be much easier they are using the same cpu architecture.

 

[Kyry]

I would pay a one time fee for ps2/3ds style backwards compatibility that just works. I dont want to have to check a list and download a patch. Thats a tragedy waiting to happen.

 

[Fisty]

Lots of people care a great deal about higher resolutions, faster loading and higher frame rates, so of course it's worth money. Or should be. Lower costs are not the same as no costs. Any global change to a game means there is a risk that things can break, so you need a full QA cycle, fix bugs that were discovered there, a new QA cycle to catch regressions, certification, etc. And people working on it could be working on more profitable things instead, so there is an opportunity cost that can be difficult to appreciate from the outside. Why take those costs if it provides so little benefit that people like you question whether it's "worth money" at all? You are essentially being generous with other people's money.



Paid PS4 Pro enhancements were not allowed by Sony, neither in the form of a paid patches nor in the form of PS4 Pro-only games. So of course nobody paid a dime. But there will definitely be PS5-only games, opening up a way to sell enhancements that simply didn't exist for the PS4/PS4 Pro. Bloodborne never received a PS4 Pro patch, presumably because it wouldn't have paid for itself. If a PS5 version of Bloodborne is released, do you really think it wouldn't sell?

Click to shrink...

I think it would generate far more negative press and attention for all parties involved than would be worth. Assuming Sony goes back on their "no paid enhancements" rule, you have From skip free Pro enhancements and charge for PS5 enhancements? Why would Sony allow that? How is the PS5 any different, functionally, than a Pro in this scenario? PS5 getting exclusives isnt "opening up" the door to basically a paid Pro patch at all

In short, if "enhancements have to be free" is the continued mandate, devs will either take the time (and likely pull in a few more sales on the same sku) if its easy/feasible or they wont and the game will still run at base performance. Opening up paid enhancements is just a can of worms that will only backfire for the sustainability and confidence in the platform itself

 

[Pancracio17]

Nah, it wont be gimped. if Xbox hadnt set the standard, maybe, but they did so im confident Sony will follow suit.

 

[Bowl0l]

Only games that have loot boxes and Sony first party are backwards compatible with the PS5.

 

[Thatguy]

I expect full land free BC. It's going to be a huge carrot for Sony/MS to bring people over from PS4/XBO. Frankly if they don't have it I might just drop console gaming. It's already dangling by a thread for me.

 

[gebler]

I think it would generate far more negative press and attention for all parties involved than would be worth. Assuming Sony goes back on their "no paid enhancements" rule, you have From skip free Pro enhancements and charge for PS5 enhancements? Why would Sony allow that? How is the PS5 any different, functionally, than a Pro in this scenario? PS5 getting exclusives isnt "opening up" the door to basically a paid Pro patch at all

In short, if "enhancements have to be free" is the continued mandate, devs will either take the time (and likely pull in a few more sales on the same sku) if its easy/feasible or they wont and the game will still run at base performance. Opening up paid enhancements is just a can of worms that will only backfire for the sustainability and confidence in the platform itself

Click to shrink...

I think the generational break matters here. Sony didn't want PS4 Pro-only games, presumably because it would effectively start a new console generation too early, and without enough of a spec bump. They want people to feel that they get enough value out of a generation before it is superseded by the next. They have been clear that the next generation will be a true generational shift, with next-gen-only games. If a 4K/60fps version of Bloodborne is released for the PS5, it will not be sold as a paid enhancement of something you already own, but simply as the PS5 version of Bloodborne. I can't imagine Sony prohibiting that.

 

[Fisty]

I think the generational break matters here. Sony didn't want PS4 Pro-only games, presumably because it would effectively start a new console generation too early, and without enough of a spec bump. They want people to feel that they get enough value out of a generation before it is superseded by the next. They have been clear that the next generation will be a true generational shift, with next-gen-only games. If a 4K/60fps version of Bloodborne is released for the PS5, it will not be sold as a paid enhancement of something you already own, but simply as the PS5 version of Bloodborne. I can't imagine Sony prohibiting that.

Click to shrink...

I disagree, that would set a very bad precedent for the ecosystem that would depress the sales of games pretty much across the board.

Example: Sony wants to sell Ghosts of Tsushima, a PS4 game, in late summer 2020. People have seen the PS5 by this point, know it is coming at the end of the year, and know it will be a better way to play GOT. If Sony doesnt make their policy on this clear, or if they announce PS5 skus of games like FF7 and TLOU2, do you think people will rush out and buy GOT? Do you think people will buy a game, see its "remaster" come out a few months later for $60, and be ok with the fact its just the same game with a spec bump that could have easily been patched into the PS4 sku? People will get tired VERY quickly of this, since they bought brand new hardware and have to pay extra money for games to actually use it. Sony wants people to be confident enough to buy games like GOT without the nagging fear of an impending "better version" and the only way to do this is to set a policy where enhancements are free, period.

Generational shift or not, Sony wants you to buy the next PS console and buying a super powerful machine to play your old PS4 titles should be a selling point of the hardware. Buying super powerful hardware just to be nickel and dimed to actually use it is beyond the pale and would be probably the second or third biggest unforced error in console history, so yeah I'm going to bet on Sony knowing this already

 

[LuigiV]

Picked lootboxes in the poll due to the sheer absurdity of the notion.

 

[Sparks]

I bet Developers will release patches for their games running on next-gen hardware, but there will definitely be Definitive/Ultimate editions that release as well, that will include all DLC and improved visuals/loading ect. Which gamers will be upset about, but a lot of this stuff simply can't just be "patched" there are a few things that would require fundamental changes ect. (mainly loading schemes ect)

 

[gebler]

I think the generational break matters here. Sony didn't want PS4 Pro-only games, presumably because it would effectively start a new console generation too early, and without enough of a spec bump. They want people to feel that they get enough value out of a generation before it is superseded by the next. They have been clear that the next generation will be a true generational shift, with next-gen-only games. If a 4K/60fps version of Bloodborne is released for the PS5, it will not be sold as a paid enhancement of something you already own, but simply as the PS5 version of Bloodborne. I can't imagine Sony prohibiting that.

Click to shrink...

I disagree, that would set a very bad precedent for the ecosystem that would depress the sales of games pretty much across the board.

Example: Sony wants to sell Ghosts of Tsushima, a PS4 game, in late summer 2020. People have seen the PS5 by this point, know it is coming at the end of the year, and know it will be a better way to play GOT. If Sony doesnt make their policy on this clear, or if they announce PS5 skus of games like FF7 and TLOU2, do you think people will rush out and buy GOT? Do you think people will buy a game, see its "remaster" come out a few months later for $60, and be ok with the fact its just the same game with a spec bump that could have easily been patched into the PS4 sku? People will get tired VERY quickly of this, since they bought brand new hardware and have to pay extra money for games to actually use it. Sony wants people to be confident enough to buy games like GOT without the nagging fear of an impending "better version" and the only way to do this is to set a policy where enhancements are free, period.

Click to shrink...

I agree that's an issue, but I don't think a general prohibition of remasters is the answer. In your example, you are talking about a game that's released after PS5 has been announced. For such a game you could clarify its level of PS5 support from the start, perhaps using a special category like PS4+PS5 indicating full support for both generations, including any future PS5 enhancements. Sony could make that the standard policy for their own cross-gen games and a recommendation for third-parties. But importantly, such a policy would not prevent the profitable release of a 4K/60fps Bloodborne, since it was never sold as a PS4+PS5 game.

Generational shift or not, Sony wants you to buy the next PS console and buying a super powerful machine to play your old PS4 titles should be a selling point of the hardware. Buying super powerful hardware just to be nickel and dimed to actually use it is beyond the pale and would be probably the second or third biggest unforced error in console history, so yeah I'm going to bet on Sony knowing this already

Click to shrink...

I don't think the PS5 will be priced so that Sony profits from console sales alone. Much of their profit is in platform fees for games sold, and people playing PS4 games they already own or got from the bargain bin don't contribute to that. BC is a big advantage for easing the transition to next-gen, preventing the old generation from having an advantage in terms of library. Anything beyond that has a cost/benefit analysis that is much less clear.

 

[Ayirek]

It probably won't.

Click to shrink...

This.

 

[Fisty]

I agree that's an issue, but I don't think a general prohibition of remasters is the answer. In your example, you are talking about a game that's released after PS5 has been announced. For such a game you could clarify its level of PS5 support from the start, perhaps using a special category like PS4+PS5 indicating full support for both generations, including any future PS5 enhancements. Sony could make that the standard policy for their own cross-gen games and a recommendation for third-parties. But importantly, such a policy would not prevent the profitable release of a 4K/60fps Bloodborne, since it was never sold as a PS4+PS5 game.



I don't think the PS5 will be priced so that Sony profits from console sales alone. Much of their profit is in platform fees for games sold, and people playing PS4 games they already own or got from the bargain bin don't contribute to that. BC is a big advantage for easing the transition to next-gen, preventing the old generation from having an advantage in terms of library. Anything beyond that has a cost/benefit analysis that is much less clear.

Click to shrink...

Remasters arent a significant revenue stream for any company except when their launch slate is empty, and in most instances only serve as advertisment for a new release in the series or a bucket of warm water during a game drought. I really dont think Sony will be willing to take the MASSIVE hit to their momentum by throwing this type of wrench in the system. Sony isn't going to make enough sales from pissed off gamers to make up for the "Fuck this I'm switching to Xbox" threads and "Sony wants more money for something Xbox does for free" Kotaku articles. It's true that remasters wont disappear completely, but they will likely have stipulations like MS puts on their late ports (the remaster has to have new content like more levels or something) so it doesnt become a situation where there are two versions of the exact same game for purchase on the PS5's store

Also theres no reason for a PS4+PS5 category for games, and introducing that is adding pointless confusion to your content offering. Either the game will be a PS4 game and work on both, or it will be a PS5 game and only works on the new one.

 

[Karateka]

MS itself also did remasters of 360 games this era.
They will continue on next xbox too.

Why good guy MS didnt make these for free owners of original games

Click to shrink...

because the owners of the original games can play the original games as they are backwards compatible with upped resolution?

I guess you think they should develop and release new games for free?

Both are BC enhancements put in to new game box and sold for full price. Literally they are not different from Red Dead Redemption patch they did with Xbox One X.

Click to shrink...

you've clearly never played gears UE... it has a whole new act and like an extra hour of campaign content.

 

[Deleted member 3017]

All three will offer native BC with the previous system. MS will continue going the extra mile and offering enhanced versions of original Xbox and 360 titles.

 

[Barrel Cannon]

-You can't play your BC titles without having a subscription to their service, thus rendering your library useless unless you keep subbing

^that's my hypothetical way of gimping it if they really wanted to

 

[flyingman]

because the owners of the original games can play the original games as they are backwards compatible with upped resolution?

I guess you think they should develop and release new games for free?


you've clearly never played gears UE... it has a whole new act and like an extra hour of campaign content.

Click to shrink...

They were all available on PC release which i played

 

[Digital-Kill3r-7]

They'll still do remasters, they'll just have to put more effort into them.

 

[Strike]

I hope not.

 

[Pyro]

I understand your cynicism OP, but Sony (I cant speak for Microsoft) has an explicit rule where devs can't charge for improvements on the PS4 Pro and I have to imagine this will be their attitude for the next gen.

Still, I'll vote for the "GOTY" editions and just making me buy PS1/PS2 Classics I already own on PS3 :(

 

[Vito]

I want to be able to pick up a ps2,ps2,ps3, ps4 disk from a charity shop, drop it in the machine and it just works.

But it's never going to happen, is it.

Click to shrink...

That would be too good to be true.

:(

 

[Deleted member 5028]

MS itself also did remasters of 360 games this era.
They will continue on next xbox too.

Why good guy MS didnt make these for free owners of original games

Click to shrink...

Because the original versions are BC? They remade those yeah, but they didn't charge for the version you already owned. Good try tho with the "good guy MS" dig

 

[supkid]

We'll definitely still get "definitive editions" on the new consoles of Halo and TLOUII etc, tailored more specifically to that hardware, but I am expecting performance boosts in the same way we got them through Pro and One X on all games.

Something akin to what the PS3 did with PS1 and PS2 games on launch, although obviously better as some of the smoothing and shit on PS2 games was horrible.

 

[Strangelove_77]

You thought about this way more than they have, I guarantee it. Are you sleeping alright?

It's just going to fucking work. It's not that big a deal.

 

[Iztok]

I don't see the reasoning behind even expecting any improvements.
BC just means BC, expect them to work/look like they do now.
Even MS doesn't improve most BC games they support.

That way, you can still do remasters. Have your cake & eat it.

 

[Remo Williams]

-You can't play your BC titles without having a subscription to their service, thus rendering your library useless unless you keep subbing

^that's my hypothetical way of gimping it if they really wanted to

Click to shrink...

Hypothetical? That's literally how it works on PS4/PS Now. Although I guess that's not really BC.

I don't see the reasoning behind even expecting any improvements.
BC just means BC, expect them to work/look like they do now.
Even MS doesn't improve most BC games they support.

That way, you can still do remasters. Have your cake & eat it.

Click to shrink...

All BC games on Xbox One come with some improvements. On Xbox One (S) all Xbox 360 games get forced vertical sync that eliminates tearing, and the vast majority of them have better performance (which sometimes includes improved loading times). Original Xbox games also get a resolution boost (and maybe additional AA as well? I think that was the case on Xbox 360, not sure about Xbox One). On Xbox One X you get additional performance improvements, additional resolution increase for original Xbox games, and forced 16x anisotropic texture filtering. That's for all games (apart from the rare cases where some of those features need to be disabled for emulation to work, although I'm not aware of any such titles), then there are additional case by case Xbox One X enhancements.

Those base improvements are the bare minimum that we should expect from BC on Scarlett, and knowing Microsoft's BC team, they'll probably expand on them as well.

 

[Lucreto]

I disagree, that would set a very bad precedent for the ecosystem that would depress the sales of games pretty much across the board.

Example: Sony wants to sell Ghosts of Tsushima, a PS4 game, in late summer 2020. People have seen the PS5 by this point, know it is coming at the end of the year, and know it will be a better way to play GOT. If Sony doesnt make their policy on this clear, or if they announce PS5 skus of games like FF7 and TLOU2, do you think people will rush out and buy GOT? Do you think people will buy a game, see its "remaster" come out a few months later for $60, and be ok with the fact its just the same game with a spec bump that could have easily been patched into the PS4 sku? People will get tired VERY quickly of this, since they bought brand new hardware and have to pay extra money for games to actually use it. Sony wants people to be confident enough to buy games like GOT without the nagging fear of an impending "better version" and the only way to do this is to set a policy where enhancements are free, period.

Generational shift or not, Sony wants you to buy the next PS console and buying a super powerful machine to play your old PS4 titles should be a selling point of the hardware. Buying super powerful hardware just to be nickel and dimed to actually use it is beyond the pale and would be probably the second or third biggest unforced error in console history, so yeah I'm going to bet on Sony knowing this already

Click to shrink...

Did this already happen last generation with The Last of Us?

The Last of Us released 5 months before PS4. The PS4 has already been announced at this stage and it didn't damage sales. Then the following June the Remaster version was released and sold well.

 

[Lucreto]

If I had to pick my poison on microtransactions on BC they should provide a vanilla version for cheap and if you want a trophy patch for PS1 or PS2 games with enhancment you pay a small fee.

 

[Imitation Of Life]

-You can't play your BC titles without having a subscription to their service, thus rendering your library useless unless you keep subbing

^that's my hypothetical way of gimping it if they really wanted to

Click to shrink...

That would be some epic(no pun intended) bullshit.

 

[Fredrik]

In a perfect world it'll be like on Xbox One X, free patches.
The first one that tries to sell the patch will get ridiculed everywhere except in the investors meetings, and they know this. But unfortunately they'll still do it.

 

[Calvarok]

i mean i think its fair for dlc for old games to still be an extra charge in the future. as long as it isnt like, the exact same price as it was at release

 

[Lady Gaia]

While I voted for Truly Complete Editions @ $60 because I think they will exist, I suspect that if you already own the game you'll simply play it complete with any advantages of running on the new hardware with zero cost. Monetization will come from those who don't already own the game. I also see no reason why $60 will be the only price point. We'll see plenty of $20 and $30 games from this generation in the store just as we do today - they'll just have a much longer sales cycle into the next generation.

 

[Hucast]

The question applies mostly to playstation because they really fucked that up with PS4 and havent proven themselves yet.

We know what XBOX does now and it probably wont be different next gen

 

[Notaskwid]

I hope that I can play Chrono Cross, Project Zero and Shadow Hearts

 

[Thera]

It will be free for games who will be patched. But not a lot of games will be patched, and probably only first party.
Games like RDR2 will relaunched on next gen to be on par with the PC version, like they does with GTA.

What will be interesting is how 2020 games will launched, with what kind of options on definition and framerate.

 

[Starlatine]

-You can't play your BC titles without having a subscription to their service, thus rendering your library useless unless you keep subbing

^that's my hypothetical way of gimping it if they really wanted to

Click to shrink...

Funny enough I stopped paying for gold and the bc games are the only ones I can play from gwg

 

[Iztok]

Hypothetical? That's literally how it works on PS4/PS Now. Although I guess that's not really BC.



All BC games on Xbox One come with some improvements. On Xbox One (S) all Xbox 360 games get forced vertical sync that eliminates tearing, and the vast majority of them have better performance (which sometimes includes improved loading times). Original Xbox games also get a resolution boost (and maybe additional AA as well? I think that was the case on Xbox 360, not sure about Xbox One). On Xbox One X you get additional performance improvements, additional resolution increase for original Xbox games, and forced 16x anisotropic texture filtering. That's for all games (apart from the rare cases where some of those features need to be disabled for emulation to work, although I'm not aware of any such titles), then there are additional case by case Xbox One X enhancements.

Those base improvements are the bare minimum that we should expect from BC on Scarlett, and knowing Microsoft's BC team, they'll probably expand on them as well.

Click to shrink...

That's not manual work, though. That's just generic emulator settings applied across all supported games.

The topic is about extra patches like the X1X ones for current BC games, which include stuff like 4k resolution bumps (this isn't by default for non-enhanced games, by the way).

Unless you believe platform holders will actually charge you for enabling emulator level settings, which is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Remo Williams]

That's not manual work, though. That's just generic emulator settings applied across all supported games.

Click to shrink...

I was merely responding to your claims that we shoud not be expecting any improvements, and that games will look and play the same way that they do now. I disagree with both those claims. If you had something else in mind, perhaps you should've expressed it more clearly.

The topic is about extra patches like the X1X ones for current BC games, which include stuff like 4k resolution bumps (this isn't by default for non-enhanced games, by the way).

Click to shrink...

It is by default for original Xbox games, it is not for Xbox 360 games.

Unless you believe platform holders will actually charge you for enabling emulator level settings, which is pretty ridiculous.

Click to shrink...

Of course it's ridiculous (at least when it comes to Microsoft), I never suggested that, the OP did, and your claims that I responded to had nothing to do with that. I think it's also ridiculous to suggest that MS would suddenly start charging people for manual BC enhancement patches.

And by the way, even the automatic enhancements don't boil down to just enabling some emulation settings and calling it a day. Each BC game is thoroughly tested before release, to find any potential issues with the enhancements, both automatic and manual.

 

[Fisty]

Did this already happen last generation with The Last of Us?

The Last of Us released 5 months before PS4. The PS4 has already been announced at this stage and it didn't damage sales. Then the following June the Remaster version was released and sold well.

Click to shrink...

I already discussed this point previously, the PS4 version of TLOU1 was a port with enhanced performance which is actually worth money, and no backwards compatibility was well understood when you bought a PS4 (and the Pro didnt exist) so there was no expectation of the PS3 version working on new hardware and getting further enhancements later.

TLOU2 wont need to be ported to PS5, so why would they sell a typical PS5 Remaster of TLOU2 when they can just release a "PS5 patch" and continue to push copies of the PS4 sku? That way people get the benefits of the hardware they paid for on a game they already bought, without buying a new version and all the negative press that would come along with that

 

[nrtn]

I think most games will get a free boost patch, like Pro/X. And I think most games on the PS5 will benefit of a Boost Mode 2.0 type of option.

 

[martincrimson87]

I think it's going to be lootboxes, but I want them to at least specify the odds of getting a legendary ambient oclussion.

 

[crazillo]

Nintendo is the big elephant in the room there. They have monetized on making games transfer from Wii to Wii U before. They cash in on remasters for Wii U games on Switch rather than honoring previous purchases. No trust in them at all, which is why I'm only getting exclusive titles for Switch.

 

[Reinhard]

They will want to sell PS5 versions of all the PS4 games, especially Rockstar with GTA V/RDR2 and SE with Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts. I predict backwards compatibility will have 0 improvements other than load times.