Do you still have all your old games from past generation consoles? Do you still want to play them? Do they even work in the next-gen console you have? No matter what your answer to any of those questions, you should check out this week's Soapbox.
The Sess sits down to talk about the PS3 Slim's lack of backwards compatability, and uses that as a springboard to explain that while he loves playing old games once in a while, re-releasing them through digital download formats gives developers a chance to go back and fix the small bugs that originally existed in the game. Check out the video below and see if you agree with Adam, then let us know in the comments below.
Subscribe to G4's Sessler's Soapbox Podcast by clicking your preferred service:
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 221–240 of 258
1191011121313
sion8
He never mention the Wii VC, because it has most(or some) of the 3rd, 4fh, and 5fh generations, but his rigth about DL old games.
Galloway
somethingthing like that but with codebraker
PSpepper
I have a PS3 hooked up to my tv. And I have a PS2 collecting dust in my closet, I even sold all my PS2 games to help me buy inFamous(which was awesome). I dont play on my PS2 anymore. I use it as a DVD player in my spare room. So if I absolutly need to play a PS2 game I will go spend $20 on a used game from Game Stop.
demonoid1011
Of course there are still many ps2 games i wnt to play like:
tekken 5
Gran Turismo 4
God of war 2
Call of duty 3
Need for speed
kturcotte1980
The less systems lying around, the better! I don't want 50 million systems lying around!
Also, don't like BC? So what if they also decided to stop supporting regular DVDs on future PS3's because Blu-Ray looks better? Or your HDTV ONLY supported HDTV, NOT SDTV, and you needed a separate TV for that? Horrible graphics or not, I still like playing my older games! I play them for the story, not the graphics.
djowalsen
I like backwards compatability and that's what made me get a PS3 instead of an Xbox (and I was seriously in limbo about which one), but at this point in the console cycle, I can totally understand why console makers just don't care about it. For people like me who only had a Gamecube and never really had a chance to play a lot of great games in that generation, being able to was a really big selling point but now that that generation is really gone by now, I don't think I would be quite as bothered by it if I were buying my first last generation console right now. I have a PS2 disc in my PS3 right now, but be totally sad if I couldn't play it.
On possible digital distribution, I don't like it. There's the personal preference of indeed having something that's tangibly yours, but I also worry about the wider implications. I know that marketing firms always target more affluent people (that's where most of the money is anyway), but a digital distribution exclusive system would exclude a large portion of the population who doesn't have access to the high speed internet necessary to download AAA titles (Think of Uncharted 2 being 50 gigs). I could probably wing it with my serviceable broadband, but it would create another barrier to being a gamer and that doesn't make me feel good.
FrontLinePlaya
thanks adam another great episode from a man who actually know what he is talking about go hard sessler
Covnam
Well you usually make a good point and I normally to agree with your soapbox vids, but I can't agree with this one. Personally, I have a lot of unplayed PS2 games that I'm slowly working my way though. I have no reason to get a PS3 right now if it can't play PS2 games. There's nothing on the console enough to warrant a purchase when I have so much else to play. It wasn't worth it when the system was $600 when the price was high because of features like blu-ray, but now for $300 it's definitely worth it. There are benefits to playing PS2 games on the PS3 as well like upscaling, memory storage.
I think a lot of the fury over the PS3 not having backwards compatibility any more has to do with the fact that it was originally included and then taken out. Especially after it was a touted feature.
At the very least, Sony could make a more expensive version (say $350 to encourage the purchase over a PS3+PS2) or make a hardware add-on that provides the same functionality. Put the choice in the consumers hands. I hardly think saying that few people were purchasing a $600 system for backwards compatibility is really a valid point.
Slink73
I love my PS2 soo much for that backwards compatability. I play more PS1 games than Ps2 haha. Dont get me wrong. I love PS2 games but i am just stuck in my PS1 world. I dont have a PS3, for a bunch of reasons, but seeing this slim, cheaper version coming out, it is tempting and the whole backwards compatablity is a turn off for me though, because i do play alot of "older" games.
Scottydsntknow
I would like to see BC come back to PS3 but it isn't the end of the world for me, I got my PS2 right next to my PS3
partyboy8967
idk personally i live with the times and dont care about my old games thats just me tho, i would much rather save 20$ on a console then have that money go towards BC
IBloodstormI
I always thought a re-release of Halo and Halo 2 remastered for the 360 and given added achievement support would be nice (and maybe online Halo 1, that would be sweet), much in the same lines as the God of War games being re-released. I would buy it just so I dont have to get the old disc's out and also because I would like to see the world created then as they would have looked now. 7 years has changed a lot.
Maybe when Bungie finishes up Reach they might give use the Halo Collection with a remastered Halo and Halo 2. A Halo fan can dream.
happymeowmeow
Adam,
Here's a few reasons why I disagree with you.
Not only do I still enjoy playing the ps2 games in my collection, I'm still being introduced to gems that I missed when they first came out. And there's the occasional new ps2 release like P4 and Devil Summoner 2 (though that trend might be over). Ok, the obvious solution is to just use a ps2. But mine has DRE issues, and kind of looks like crap plugged into my hdtv, and theres no room for it unless I maybe install another shelf on the wall or something...
So digital re releases of old classics, you are assuming developers will actually be willing to put extra time and money into ports, which experience tells me is unlikely. Most digital ports are and probably will be straight up emulation with no improvements or tweaks. It doesn't make sense for them to spend money on improvements unless there's the feeling that people wont buy ports without them.
That all being said BC is not a big issue with me. Just one of the the many pros or cons you weigh when deciding to buy a new console. I thought you might have something to say about the 3.0 firmware update shenanigans today , that's what I've been thinking about. I'm so going to wait at least a week to update.... too bad you can't use psn without it... theres another con right there...
S0m3xN00b
what i want to see is a reboot of metal gear solid for ps3 with updated graphics n all
Fex_Anderson
I like backwards compatability but I don't really need it. I do like the fact that I can download FF7 and MGS onto my PSP a lot, though. But I do agree that we need to let go of backwards compatability as we know it.
pgerv12
Haha i have the original 60gb Ps3 with backwards but i got to say i've only played like 2 games (metal Gear solid 2 and 3) and the only reason is i'm to lazy to go downstairs to play on the ps2 but still if there wasn't backward i would go on the ps2
killaskillz2009
I enjoy having backwards compatibility on my new gen system. It allows me to have one unit, as Adam said, and lets me enjoy my old games when i occasionally get nostalgic. Though that is a rarity, its still nice to have backwards compatibility when it arises. It also allows me to to play old games I have never played before. I just bought Shadow of the Colossus and Psychonauts for PS2 and its nice to be able to play them on my PS3 (I have the old 60G).
Though many games can be re-released as DLC in the stores, I tend to have a problem with this when I already own the game. Marvel vs. Capcom 2 being an example. I already own that game for PS2, why should I have to pay $20 (or whatever it costs) now for a game i already own? Yea, they added new things like the ability to play online and refined it (so it may not be the best example, maybe RE4 or House of the Dead would be better), but I find the original just as good. And many games they just re-release without any improvements or refinements. Though the cost is minimal, I assume you understand where I'm coming from at as far as paying for what I already paid for.
Another issue is Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo haven't released every single past game as DLC, so I can't play all the games in my library like i can with backwards compatibility. That's being a bit nit-picky, but I feel gaming companies should still consider it when they are attempting to create the "perfect" entertainment system and claim it can do everything (I'm looking at you Sony...).
Its not a huge issue that would weigh heavily on my decision to by a system, like most people my main concern is the future and next gen games. It's just something that's nice/convenient to have. And until they do perfect the DLC format and let me download games I already own for free, I think backwards compatibility should be kept.
krypto74
But Adam, I still play my old games because I can't AFFORD the new stuff. 60 bucks is a big number in this economy. Hell, 29.99 is a big number in this economy.
nickgwear
I agree on the not needing backwards compatability thing. I dont need it and I still have a lot of PS2 and PS1 games, well over 40 in total. I also have the original systems though so it wouldn't matter anyway if my PS3 were BC or not. I don't buy new systems to play old games, same reason why someone wouldn't buy a new car and drive their old used one. Most people who wants BC don't realize that when you get the new system and get new games you really start to forget about the old games and you lose your desire to play them.
Even with all those old games and the systems, I haven't picked one up in over a year and I have a lot of playworthy games (GOW, RE4, NFS, GTA, MGS...)
In fact last time I played a last gen game I look at it and laughed at how bad the graphics and gameplay was and said, "Wow this is how games used to look?" Once you play the new stuff, it's hard to go back from it.
P.S. Sessler messed up having castlevania playing in the background, I was so busy watching that I was hardly paying attention to what he was saying, lol.
SnakeYukin
I think as Adam brought up at one point: I like to have one console to play the games from their previous consoles. I still have a couple of PS1 games that I haven't finished and, as I gave away my PS1 to my father, I have to use my PS2 or my computer, thankfully a program can help me run those CDs, to play those game. So it's not as always as easy to just go and plug up an older version of the console because we might have possibly sold those consoles because we needed the money but relied on the next generation of consoles to be able to play the previous generation games. Heck, when I finally got my 360 a year ago, I was going to sell my Xbox to get some money back, but when I learned that several games weren't compatiable with it, then I didn't want to risk not being able to play some of the games I haven't played yet, might buy, or want to go back and revisit.
Now, I agree, to a degree, that having digital distribution versions of the games are good as it's an easier way to get and play those older games along with it sometimes even being cheaper. Especially if those games don't work anymore; however, the problem seems to be that I'm being told that I'll have to pay to play those exact same games again, but they may have some slight tweeks to it. If I've already bought the game, then there should be some system set up that allows me to download the game for free because if there are several old games I want to play, I'll logically think it'll be better to spend money on getting the system again instead of buying several of those games again.
The only time I would have no problem with buying an old game is if the entire game was remade with better graphics, music, longer length, more to do, etc. then I would go with buying it again; however, I have a feeling that when that'll happen, it'll be released on disk at a $60 value over putting it on a games on demand type of service for $10, $20, or more. At least in videos and music, there are ways for you to transfer them onto a newer form of distribution, but for games, we can't transfer them onto the newer form of disk/device used and also make them work.
Displaying 221–240 of 258
1191011121313