I don't think they will be console exclusivesXbox console exclusives to be exact. And yeah, let's hope so. That's the reason why MS bought some studios. To push GamePass.
I don't think they will be console exclusivesXbox console exclusives to be exact. And yeah, let's hope so. That's the reason why MS bought some studios. To push GamePass.
You don't think Xbox will be the only console for these games?
Sony's track record is unmatched but hey, let's not look at their full track record.
No one's saying PS5 is fucked. But things like Vita, Now, VR and Classic still exist.
Oh no. I was just saying they'll be on pc tooYou don't think Xbox will be the only console for these games?
Yep :) Only on the Xbox console (console-exclusive) and on PC. That's MS strategy now.
It's "ccn" and not CNN ;)Always nice when someone outs themselves as being clueless about videogames.
Imagine getting the opportunity to write for CNN and coming out with such drivel.
dat 1% :)It'll be interesting to see how Tencent's Switch does in the mainland too.
No one's saying PS5 is fucked. But things like Vita, Now, VR and Classic still exist.
lol my bad, will edit. Still a shitty piece.Yep :) Only on the Xbox console (console-exclusive) and on PC. That's MS strategy now.
It's "ccn" and not CNN ;)
If hackers can make a ps3 emulator so can Sony. That's how I see it. and If ps5 cost $800 with full BC support I'd buy it... But next-gen Xbox can do it with comparable hardware with half the price Sony should prioritize that or bring it at a later date.
Yup...and with digital it's a big opportunity to get new gamers in emerging markets. This is where Switch is taking some of Sony's lunch with regards to indies, but it's still potentially good business to push a $150 PS4 into developing gaming markets.Precisely this. The PS4 will be around for a loooooong time. Much longer than the PS3 was supported by developers. Especially because for most AA and indie titles they'll run just fine on the PS4 and autom work on the PS5.
Keep lowering the price and get more people locked into the PlayStation ecosystem. Leave the PS5 to AAAA first party exclusives and the best place to play cross gen 3rd party games.
This is a preview of what PS5 launch will look like (except there will be even more people).
Maybe I should check my alerts more often and not let them pile up >.>If I get time, I will try and find the various posts in the Sales topics that proved (using stats etc) that exclusives do matter. IIRC Welfare was behind much of that.
Killzone 2 is 91 rated. Horizon is 89 rated.Did we know guerilla games would make a much better game than Killzone? No we didn't so how can we conclude the same with Microsoft or Nintendo? We can't other than loyalty.
You have to admit that simply by looking at those things and defining them as "subplatforms" means that you're reaching to find weaknesses when we're talking about mainline stuff which is Sony's bread and butter. Even PSP sold 70m which is a great number for a debut handheld. PSVR is selling I think as well as Pro and X, is the best selling high-end VR device and something Sony will continue to support for the next generation as a long term venture. Even the success of PSVR was built upon EyeToy and PS Move, so it's hard to consider those failures in the long term when VR is a big part of PlayStation's future.In Gen 7 they were functionally 3rd for most of the duration of it even though they might've ended with a barely higher ltd than 360 in the end. Still a very strong showing relatively though and an incredible latter cycle recovery that set them up well for Gen 8. They led by a ridiculous amount in Gens 5-6 though and also Gen 8 (if we consider Switch Gen 9).
On the other hand they're not infallible as their other struggling/failing console line (PSP/Vita) showed. Subplatforms (Pocketstation, EyeToy, PS mobile, PS Move, Wonder Book, PS Now, PSVR, PS Classic, etc) seem pretty mixed too ranging from unremarkable performers to niche experiments to complete failures.
Having an unofficial emulator that you run on a PC is completely different than having an official emulator on your flagship hardware, running games that people actually paid for, and by people who might not even know what emulation is. It's just a whole other ball game.
And they would be crazy to make the hardware $800 even if they got full BC with it. The fact is, the hardware comes first, and then they're going to look at features they can implement with it, including the extent of the BC.
I'm not really sure your Nintendo comparison works there. I mean if we take Wii U as example, yes it still had an incredible 1st party software commitment (like 3DS, like PS3, unlike Vita) but no Nintendo wasn't willing to invest the marketing or enact the structural changes needed to turn the platform around (unlike 3DS, unlike PS3, exactly like Vita). Wii U and Vita were both platforms that their makers essentially let die, which is pretty unlike what we tend to see from the Nintendo handheld or PS home console line, no matter the losses.PSP is plagued by privacy issue considering how easy it is to mod the thing. But to your central point that Sony is definitely not infallible, but when they put their A team to work the results are always positive, unlike PSP and Vita, where their best first and the third-party developers didn't work on them. It's a bit different than Nintendo when they had their A team on Gamecube and WiiU, those hardware still flop.
You will see more platform holder invest in VR including MS and Nintendo when the tech and price are ready for more mainstream adoption. VR is not just a Sony thing and it's in the infancy stage. It's like the big and heavy cellphones people are carrying 20 years ago but the tech improves enough for primetime eventually.
Okay it's going somewhere so slowly it appears to be standing still I guess. 4.2m in 2.5 years isn't exactly showing us real momentum.Sony started researching and working on VR years before PSVR was released. It has gone from research project to full consumer release, soon to see a new version/generation. It has obviously both gone somewhere and taken off, but it moves slowly, hence the "long game" rhetoric.
I'd describe Labo VR as a singular game and not a promoted platform. I guess you could make the argument Labo overall could be a subplatform but I think that might be stretching it too, there's no sdk support or 3rd party program for Labo even.
I wonder what gave them a hard time on PS4 though. Found it so odd that not only did they take so long for the PS2 games but they were also not performing optimally. They soon just gave up on it all and really dropped the ball with the low effort.PC architecture is the same as PS4 they should be able to do it. I think its completely possible especially since Xbox can do it. The Vita had a PSP emulator Sony could do that or build one from scratch that would be hard to hack. But I think its 100% possible if they truly wanted to. Do you know how many PS3 and PS2 games I have lying around collecting dust? Thats a massive selling point to bring those game in use.
I'm not really sure your Nintendo comparison works there. I mean if we take Wii U as example, yes it still had an incredible 1st party software commitment (like 3DS, like PS3, unlike Vita) but no Nintendo wasn't willing to invest the marketing or enact the structural changes needed to turn the platform around (unlike 3DS, unlike PS3, exactly like Vita). Wii U and Vita were both platforms that their makers essentially let die, which is pretty unlike what we tend to see from the Nintendo handheld or PS home console line, no matter the losses.
The cellphone comparison seems off too. Phones really broke out when they moved past being phones and became handheld computers. You're speaking about VR like it's an industry inevitability but that seems so remote from and at odds with the commercial reality I'm not really sure how to even address it?
PC architecture is the same as PS4 they should be able to do it. I think its completely possible especially since Xbox can do it. The Vita had a PSP emulator Sony could do that or build one from scratch that would be hard to hack. But I think its 100% possible if they truly wanted to. Do you know how many PS3 and PS2 games I have lying around collecting dust? Thats a massive selling point to bring those game in use.
It doesn't have to be an new emulator it could be the exact PS3 built into the PS5 like how the Vita had PSP built in. Of course Sony would have to do some tweaks to get it secure but they can do that. The PS3 classics route is giving XBox a win becaue they can do it and build out the compatability as time goes on. If sony doesn't learn that with the ps5 it'll be a shit show with PS5 and trying to profit from games players already have twice.Here's the RPCS3 compat list.
Do you really think Sony would want to bring that to PS5? Of the tested games, 44% can't be finished, have serious glitches or have insufficient performance. And then there are the games that don't even work at all.
The problem Sony has is that PS2 and PS3 were pretty exotic hardware, while the Xboxes used more off the shelf parts and an architecture that's easier to emulate. That's why it's easier for MS to offer Xbox BC. There are also less Xbox games to implement support for, and even less games that people are demanding for.
Sony might go for "PS3 Classics" the same way they did PS2 Classics, but full PS3 BC is basically out of the picture. For full PS2 BC there's actually a much bigger chance of it happening.
It doesn't have to be an new emulator it could be the exact PS3 built into the PS5 like how the Vita had PSP built in. Of course Sony would have to do some tweaks to get it secure but they can do that. The PS3 classics route is giving XBox a win becaue they can do it and build out the compatability as time goes on. If sony doesn't learn that with the ps5 it'll be a shit show with PS5 and trying to profit from games players already have twice.
Sony might go for "PS3 Classics" the same way they did PS2 Classics, but full PS3 BC is basically out of the picture. For full PS2 BC there's actually a much bigger chance of it happening.
Its something they did for BC it could be layered. Once a PS3 game is played it goes to that. It seems like a simple route. As long as the games work I wouldn't care what method they use. People would buy it because they still have their old games.Why the hell would Sony build a PS3 inside the PS5? That would be the craziest mistake they could make hardware wise.
Sony did learn from the mistakes from PS3, that's why PS4 is the way it is, and why they won't ruin the PS5 with something as crazy as that.
Sony has Europe in the bag, almost all territories leaned heavily towards the PlayStation.I think it's more like this:
Japan and Asia: Nintendo >> Sony >>>>> MS
Europe: Nintendo > Sony >> MS
US: Nintendo > MS >> Sony
Rest of the World: Sony >> Nintendo >>>> MS
I can't see Sony bothering to add BC past PS4, there's not enough of a reward to incentivize it.
Its something they did for BC it could be layered. Once a PS3 game is played it goes to that. It seems like a simple route. As long as the games work I wouldn't care what method they use. People would buy it because they still have their old games.
Ignoring PS1 for obvious reasons, 2/3 of Sony home consoles had BC at launch. And we know why PS4 didn't have PS3 BC, because it wasn't economically possible.
There is nothing stoping Sony from offering digital BC with the ps2 or the ps1, they just need to put the effort in creating the emulator.
Cant believe that a multi bilion dollar company cant just create a emulator for a 25 and a 20 year old hardware.
I believe the emulators in the PS3/Vita were the routes to certain forms of hacking/homebrew/piracy.
I hate to be Mr. Pessimistic but one of the main points of ps now is the "backwards compatibility." I simply can't see them putting anything but ps4 BC in the ps5 because of this. Why give away BC for ps3 or 2 for free when you can monetize it via PS NOW. ?
Lol u crazy? Cell processor was always an exclusive part. Putting that into ps5 would needlessly make it more expensiveIt doesn't have to be an new emulator it could be the exact PS3 built into the PS5 like how the Vita had PSP built in. Of course Sony would have to do some tweaks to get it secure but they can do that. The PS3 classics route is giving XBox a win becaue they can do it and build out the compatability as time goes on. If sony doesn't learn that with the ps5 it'll be a shit show with PS5 and trying to profit from games players already have twice.
I think that's a fair point, but it's possible that they will pivot PSNOW into a broader game streaming service targeting devices beyond PS consoles, at which point its functionality as pseudo-BC would no longer be its most important feature.I hate to be Mr. Pessimistic but one of the main points of ps now is the "backwards compatibility." I simply can't see them putting anything but ps4 BC in the ps5 because of this. Why give away BC for ps3 or 2 for free when you can monetize it via PS NOW. ?