Clearly Microsoft is king here, but I'm amazed that Nintendo and Sony are neck and neck in votes here. With Nintendo you've got some kind of fair argument maybe, but why the hell is anyone voting for Sony?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
How would you rate Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft at making their past games available?
- Thread starter oni-link
- Start date
It better not be, at least as far as PS4 backwards compatibility goes. That at least better be native. I really, really would like to get PS3 backwards compatibility though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_backward_compatible_games_for_Xbox_One
530 atm out of 2103. Which is nearly a quarter of the games released on the 360.
Oh. I consider the microconsoles existing at all to be a mark against Nintendo. I'm not buying a novelty chunk of plastic that's going to end up in my closet after a week. Put those games on Switch.
Honestly I am trying to understand all the "MS good, N ok and PS bad" posts.
MS is miles away from anyone thats a fact and anyone trying to discuss this is outta of their minds!
But what is N doing that Sony isn't?
I look at the Switch and look at the PS4, then I look at PS Legacy and Nintendo Legacy and even tho both are not handling it how it should be I think Sony is ahead of N in anyway possible : PS Now, Remakes/Remasters and PS2 Classics.
Trying to bring the Wii to the discussion in 2018 doesn't make sense.
MS is miles away from anyone thats a fact and anyone trying to discuss this is outta of their minds!
But what is N doing that Sony isn't?
I look at the Switch and look at the PS4, then I look at PS Legacy and Nintendo Legacy and even tho both are not handling it how it should be I think Sony is ahead of N in anyway possible : PS Now, Remakes/Remasters and PS2 Classics.
Trying to bring the Wii to the discussion in 2018 doesn't make sense.
It's clear that both Nintendo and Sony want recurring purchases for classic games, they don't just want you to have a game that you keep forever that's cross buy with future consoles. Nintendo's solution, after having separate VC libraries for every console, was to settle on a subscription service to make sure consumers would continuously spend money to play classic games. Sony sticks with remasters and rereleases which may or may not be carried to next gen.
Microsoft by far. They're basically executing the ideal version of it. What nintendo used to do, but through software emulation and allowing your digital library to come forward as well.
Nintendo struggling because it lost HW back compatibility plus killing eShop too hurt them here badly. Otherwise they'd be close to where MS is. They ahve something...but it just pales to what they had before and theres now the added fear that It wont exist on hardware going forward.
Sony...just not even bothering anymore. It was pretty much built in to the PS2 and PS3 (early models) and they had some basic graphical enhancements to go with them.
Nintendo struggling because it lost HW back compatibility plus killing eShop too hurt them here badly. Otherwise they'd be close to where MS is. They ahve something...but it just pales to what they had before and theres now the added fear that It wont exist on hardware going forward.
Sony...just not even bothering anymore. It was pretty much built in to the PS2 and PS3 (early models) and they had some basic graphical enhancements to go with them.
I assume to take a shot at Sony since it doesn't mention remasters. Don't get me wrong MS is the best on this no questions asked, but I hope Sony remasters pretty much everything from the PS1/2 era.
Sony did a microconsole too though. They just did it way way worse.
For active platforms Sony has PS4, which has PSNow (ymmv) and a small selection of PS2 remasters that's apparently done being added to.
For active platforms Nintendo has Switch and 3DS. Switch has NES Online, small selection now but continually being added to, and some older Nintendo arcade games licensed to Hamster for Arcade Archives. 3DS has a Virtual Console, probably the worst VC (NES, GB, GBC and SNES for n3Ds) but still significantly better than what Switch or PS4 have scraped together.
Vita's not an actvely supported platform for Sony. It's in the same camp as Wii U for Nintendo.
I picked Nintendo since overall they do a good job of releasing their content for each new generation since the SNES.
I haven't followed the Xbox since being burned by the multiple RROD consoles. If their game preservation is as good as everyone is saying; I might grab a Xbox when the next gen starts.
I haven't followed the Xbox since being burned by the multiple RROD consoles. If their game preservation is as good as everyone is saying; I might grab a Xbox when the next gen starts.
Not sure what difference that makes tbh. It's newer than 3DS and is available to play now.
I specifically mentioned BC efforts. Sony has done a lot more under the PS Classics umbrella. Not all of them are available on PS4, and the PS Classic mini console didn't turn out in the best possible way so far, but in the grand scheme of things Sony is doing a lot, including their PSP remasters on PS4, in particular Castlevania Requiem which is huge deal. That's a different level of depth that MS just can't offer.
If support stopped years ago and production is ending it's not an active platform. Vita and Wii U are now legacy platforms themselves to be considered for legacy support on newer systems, while 3DS (much to Era's chagrin) isn't. It's still being pushed, still being promoted, has 1st party games still in development and even got a new hardware model last year. Vita isn't "newer" in any way that actually matters.
I mean, Microsoft is clearly the best by some distance. Like, if you forced me to criticise it, the only one I would have is that only some of the games get that 4k bump, but the stuff they've done on that front is incredible already, and would surely be impossible to apply to every game in any kind of timeframe.
Between the other two, I suppose Nintendo just about edges it. They both do a few HD remakes/remasters of their older titles, so they're even there. So it comes down to these "Classic" systems, and at the very least, Nintendo's ones seem to be at least decent, whereas the less said about the PS Classic the better at this point. Regardless, both are absolutely miles behind Microsoft.
Between the other two, I suppose Nintendo just about edges it. They both do a few HD remakes/remasters of their older titles, so they're even there. So it comes down to these "Classic" systems, and at the very least, Nintendo's ones seem to be at least decent, whereas the less said about the PS Classic the better at this point. Regardless, both are absolutely miles behind Microsoft.
pretty much seems like a way to complain about mini consoles and rebuying old games lol
Sony: 1/10. PS Classic exists, at least.
Nintendo: 2/10. Classic systems exist, and they have that limited paid online thing.
Microsoft: 6/10. Some actual backward compatibility and the ability to buy said games. Discs work. Compatibility is limited though.
PC: 8/10. For the most part things work. If they don't you can usually fix them one way or another. Generally no need to rebuy things unless you want to for accessibility purposes or possible improvements. Not always easy and a few things can't be made to work right though.
Nintendo: 2/10. Classic systems exist, and they have that limited paid online thing.
Microsoft: 6/10. Some actual backward compatibility and the ability to buy said games. Discs work. Compatibility is limited though.
PC: 8/10. For the most part things work. If they don't you can usually fix them one way or another. Generally no need to rebuy things unless you want to for accessibility purposes or possible improvements. Not always easy and a few things can't be made to work right though.
Microsoft has shown how it's done, at this point. Eventually, their entire library across every generation will be made available, that's absolutely insane. I know, especially in Nintendo's case that that would be incredibly difficult unless they added a cart reader of sorts, as well as motion support and second screen for the Wii U stuff that used it-- but the digital option for a good portion of their history. Especially when they have something like Smash, like, that game alone is advertisement. Wouldn't it be nice to be like "Damn, I love playing Ike, but I've never played his game. I'll grab it on the eShop later", or, "All this pokemon stuff is making me nostalgic, I really wanna go back and play some" etc--
Not only are Microsoft going out of their way to make as many old games available as possible, they're making many of them look and perform better.
I'm not sure how there's 42 weirdos who answered otherwise.
I'm not sure how there's 42 weirdos who answered otherwise.
From this perspective though Nintendo would also be ahead of Sony with Virtual Console, Classic Minis and their many more remakes and remasters. So why'd you vote for Sony over them?
Oh, PC is a 10/10 for sure. Especially if you're counting legal emulation. In a lot of cases, it's the best way to play some of these games, period.
Microsoft is really the only company committed to it, 100% of the votes should be going to Microsoft in this poll, but I'm satisfied that at least ~90% are, and then you've got like 40 console fanboy diehards who could never pick another company other than their preferred one for any poll. You could have a poll that says "What console plays Forza Horizon 4 best?" with these same three options, and 10% of people would pick the Sony or Nintendo console, and come up with some argument that they don't want to play FH4, they want to play Mario Kart or Driveclub, so that's why they chose that console.
Nintendo is the only company actively against it, that seems to prevent emulated games releasing on new hardware in favor of specific hardware catering to a handful of games. Nintendo probably has the highest demand in this area too, but seems to use that demand to flex its muscles when they want to boost the share price.
And Sony seems to have an ever changing perspective that they never nail down consistently, at times supporting the availability of classic games and at times pretending that there's no demand for classic games. Sony will issue remasters of classic games and sell them, which I think is better than there being no option.
Nintendo is the only company actively against it, that seems to prevent emulated games releasing on new hardware in favor of specific hardware catering to a handful of games. Nintendo probably has the highest demand in this area too, but seems to use that demand to flex its muscles when they want to boost the share price.
And Sony seems to have an ever changing perspective that they never nail down consistently, at times supporting the availability of classic games and at times pretending that there's no demand for classic games. Sony will issue remasters of classic games and sell them, which I think is better than there being no option.
How so? PS4 has a lot more old gen titles available than Switch does.
The Nintendo that killed Wii Shop (and the DSI shop) and doesn't even have Virtual Console on Switch? And I actively detest what they're doing with the NOS.
Nintendo used to be amazing, but at this point in time they're really really not. Anything good that they have left is legacy from Satoru Iwata's era, and it looks like they want to cut off those ties as quick as they stop turning in the biggest bucks.
It's not even up for debate as far as this generation is concerned. Microsoft continues to impress with their unprecedented efforts to not only preserve but improve upon games of yore. PS4 is a lost cause at this point, but if Sony doesn't have a similar plan for the next generation I will be profoundly disappointed as a lifelong PlayStation fan.
Sony doesn't have PS Classics on PS4 either though, they also killed ther PSP store (although you can still sideload games from PC/PS3), PS+ and PSNow both dropped PS3/Vita... their retro efforts also seem largely focused on legacy platforms and those are at an end too, the west hasn't gotten a PS Classic release in over 2 years (3 years for Europe). The strikes against Nintendo you laid out here all also appear to apply to Sony so I can't really follow the reasoning? Feels more like a preference in search of a rationalization.
Don't even own an Xbox and never will; but their backward compatibility is the only reason I'd think about getting a OneX; really admirable the amount of effort and commitment it takes and it shames both PS and Nintendo.
Just got Nintendo online today (In preparation for Smash) and really underwhelmed by the offering in the arcade thing. I know it's beating a dead horse but it's so lackluster it hurts.
Edit: Sony used to make more of an effort with the PS3/PSP/Vita era; I can't tell you how many PS1 titles I purchased due to their relative fair pricing to me considering you gained access to them across all the PS platforms at the time. Starting with the PSP and moving onto the Vita I can attest that the PS emulation on the handheld front was amazing. Really a shame that Sony hasn't brought back the Classics titles to PS4.
Just got Nintendo online today (In preparation for Smash) and really underwhelmed by the offering in the arcade thing. I know it's beating a dead horse but it's so lackluster it hurts.
Edit: Sony used to make more of an effort with the PS3/PSP/Vita era; I can't tell you how many PS1 titles I purchased due to their relative fair pricing to me considering you gained access to them across all the PS platforms at the time. Starting with the PSP and moving onto the Vita I can attest that the PS emulation on the handheld front was amazing. Really a shame that Sony hasn't brought back the Classics titles to PS4.
Last edited:
PS4 is 3.5 years older than Switch. And it still has fewer legacy 1st party titles available.
With objectively you mean :
- One has unified Account System giving you access to Cross Purchases and Cross Save while other don't.
- One has a hardware that can make remakes/remasters that really have a nice upgrade over the OG versions, specially last gen ones, while the other don't.
- One has a Streaming Service with previous gens games available not only on their own plataform but also on PC while other don't.
- One has a selection of Classics on their current plataform while other don't.
Objectively you could say that N doing Retro Mini Consoles better than Sony and I would agree. But that's all.
lmao. Are you kidding me? Nintendo is much better at it than sony. They're the worst by a far mile in pretty much every gen including this one
Microsoft - B+
Nintendo - D
Sony - F
Microsoft's been pretty great, and has the most forward-thinking pro-consumer stance on BC. The fact that OG Xbox disks work is a huge plus, the only downside is that they're very slow to update that OG Xbox library. Nintendo has done a great job of making sure you can rebuy most of their Wii U library, but their hardware makes BC generally more difficult, and their Netflix-esque Online service is only for a small number of NES games- nothing from the rest of their history, despite their massive back catalog. Sony is doing fuck all, except selling a very tiny handful of PS2 games I guess.
Nintendo - D
Sony - F
Microsoft's been pretty great, and has the most forward-thinking pro-consumer stance on BC. The fact that OG Xbox disks work is a huge plus, the only downside is that they're very slow to update that OG Xbox library. Nintendo has done a great job of making sure you can rebuy most of their Wii U library, but their hardware makes BC generally more difficult, and their Netflix-esque Online service is only for a small number of NES games- nothing from the rest of their history, despite their massive back catalog. Sony is doing fuck all, except selling a very tiny handful of PS2 games I guess.
One also has a platform of 5 years, the other don't. Not even counting the history where nintendo did much more for backward compatibility and with vc unlike with sony where I still can't buy ps1 games on ps4 and my games of ps3 are locked on it.
1. has nothing to do with "past games" made by Sony on current systems
2. Switch also has "value added" remakes/remasters of older games. We are talking about Sony's own output, so stuff like Crash/Spyro/etc. isn't really going to count.
3. Point taken but I was referring to the ability to purchase individual titles.
4. The Switch does? Lots of the same stuff the PS4 has plus many exclusives (like the ACA Nintendo stuff)
