PS5 May Be Fully Backwards Compatible

[godslabrat]

 

It's where the world is going. Most people really don't think into the future beyond a few years. I won't buy digital until they've actually dealt with digital management of content/ownership. If I can't own something, I don't buy it.

 

And yes, I understand I don't own the data on the games. But, I own the item itself which contains the game that will last years. It's not dependent on servers being online and HDDs not crashing. I always make sure the games I buy play/operate without updates.

 

And yes, I know modern systems are basically computers and the next generations will be backwards compatible(more than likely). That's not the point as I'd just use my PC for digital. When consoles go digital, I'm out. I have no plans on buying an X or next Xbox. I won't support gamepass or forced digital.

 

 

As for why Sony is still doing great with physical media....that's a good question if true. After owning all the consoles this generation(Wii U, Xbox One, PS4 Pro, Switch), I would say the PS4 feels the most like a gaming console. Most games play pretty quickly compared to the dumpster fire Xbox that takes hours to download a game. The OS feels like a game console and the store isn't that pushy unlike the Microsoft store. With the Xbox, if it dies I'll probably trade in the games and replace them with PS4 versions. I don't mind the graphics will take a slight hit, that's not the point of owning a console. It's ease of use and great games. Nintendo is Nintendo.

Forget the next generation... the current one offers a lot of conflicting media issues: if the current Sony/MS consoles just use discs for install, and are still heavily reliant on servers, is there an advantage to having discs? I want there to be one, but I'm struggling to see it.

[Outdoormongoose]

Forget the next generation... the current one offers a lot of conflicting media issues: if the current Sony/MS consoles just use discs for install, and are still heavily reliant on servers, is there an advantage to having discs? I want there to be one, but I'm struggling to see it.

 

I don't mind the function of downloading games to the HDD. Modern games are very large, complex, and the hard drive helps load data faster. The big con with that is digital games and updates are gone if the drive dies.

 

I research games and almost never buy them new. I look for complete on disc games.

 

The conflict is a conflict between business practices and ownership. It's far easier/cheaper for them to simply have the games on a server you download then have a physical they have to manufacture. Those servers can be re-purposed fairly easily while the maybe not so great selling game discs can't be.

 

I really wish Gamestop would have started to push publishing/exclusivity of newer games and Indies. If there is no digital version of their games....

[godslabrat]

I don't mind the function of downloading games to the HDD. Modern games are very large, complex, and the hard drive helps load data faster. The big con with that is digital games and updates are gone if the drive dies.

 

I research games and almost never buy them new. I look for complete on disc games.

 

The conflict is a conflict between business practices and ownership. It's far easier/cheaper for them to simply have the games on a server you download then have a physical they have to manufacture. Those servers can be re-purposed fairly easily while the maybe not so great selling game discs can't be.

 

I really wish Gamestop would have started to push publishing/exclusivity of newer games and Indies. If there is no digital version of their games....

It's not the installation of the games on the drive I mind... it's the fact that enough of the game has to be installed as a "patch" that the game can't reliably be played if the publisher disappears.

[doctorclu]

PS4 has been awesome. Watching Hulu on it now and I sometimes play games on it.

 

But if the PS5 is fully backwards compatible I might have a reason to buy another Playstation.

[Outdoormongoose]

It's not the installation of the games on the drive I mind... it's the fact that enough of the game has to be installed as a "patch" that the game can't reliably be played if the publisher disappears.

 

Gotcha.

 

It's basically what I said up above. A good example is Rick and Morty VR.

 

Game works fine until an "update" killed the game at a certain point. Uninstalled, killed psn/updates, reinstalled and played. Worked like a charm after that so the game works fine without the publisher being around anymore.

 

I really hope that, if it is backwards compatible, it isn't a cloud based system. Such as, the disc is just a cd-key for the game they made a cloud version of that works on the PS5. I don't actually view that as "backwards compatibility" as it is really just a digital version of the game.

[Atari Dogs]

My question is what is wrong with the current video game market. I probably had one hundred ps2 games, 125 ps3 games, and for the ps4 maybe 30. Am I old and not buying as many games for me or my kids? I don't buy Madden every year like I used to. And have not bought as many of the ps4 Lego games. I still bought every COD and Asassins Creed. Am I missing out on downloadable games? I am only seeing a handful of must have games a year for the ps4. Ninety percent of my games were bought during the current life of the console, which if Sony comes out with a new console in 2020 I would only be getting 5 to 10 more ps4 games. If the trend continues I would only buy 20 ps5 games at most.

Edited February 17, 2019 by Atari Dogs

[Video]

That was my point. People think installing the game to the hdd is the same as downloading it. It's not. My ps4 is used primarily to play games, and so far, or the 40 or so games I have for it, none (outside of elder scrolls online) have required interaction with the internet at all.

 

On the other hand, the Xbox one, eh, as of yet, I haven't played a game yet from a disc. Yes I get the game disc, but it's literally just a key to download the game from the internet. None will even work initially until you hook up to the internet.

 

With your neck in our woods, requiring internet to even start a game is simply impractical, and to have to download it simply isn't happening. I've got no doubt digital does great, but there are ,believe it or not, still plenty of places where a console simply isn't going to sell it it can't be operated independent of the net.

[Austin]

On the other hand, the Xbox one, eh, as of yet, I haven't played a game yet from a disc. Yes I get the game disc, but it's literally just a key to download the game from the internet. None will even work initially until you hook up to the internet.

 

In most cases this is false and what I think what you are confusing is the difference in how these systems operate. Both install every disc to the hard drive. The PS4 does it much more seamlessly.

 

Xbox One discs are not simply "keys", downloading is not mandatory (in most cases, like with the PS4 and Switch), and game data is actually on the disc.

 

When you insert a disc into the Xbox One, if there is an update available, it simply asks you if you want to do so. If you see a pop-up, you can select "Update later" and install the game from the disc as usual. When you go to play the game, chances are it will ask to update again, but like before simply decline it.

 

I've even tested two previously uninstalled games (but now re-installed, thanks) to demonstrate it.

 

Shadow Warrior has no patches, so it installs entirely from the disc:

 

 

Ryse: Son of Rome has an update, but again, you can choose to ignore it. It then installs the game from the disc and doesn't touch the internet. The game is fully playable without an update:

 

 

Note that it is generally recommended to update in this day and age. Patches often include bug fixes, performance improvements, or other useful features. If you buy games on disc, you will (in most cases) get a functioning game. I've brought it up before but I'll say it again: Tony Hawk 5 is probably the most infamous example I can think of from this generation where the disc was basically a key and 95% of the content had to be downloaded. This is the exception to the rule and both the PS4 and the Switch have the same (or similar) examples of mandatory downloads.

 

Also, on the Xbox One side, I have noticed that if you update during the disc installation, sometimes it will just download the whole thing from the internet. This is considerably faster for some of us than installing from the disc itself but it is not mandatory.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Austin

[+davidcalgary29]

I just wish Sony would support the Vita for a few more years. It’s a lovely system.

[Austin]

When you insert a disc into the Xbox One, if there is an update available, it simply asks you if you want to do so. If you see a pop-up, you can select "Update later" and install the game from the disc as usual. When you go to play the game, chances are it will ask to update again, but like before simply decline it.

Correction: I tested Ryse since it does have an update. Instead of giving an "update later" option like it does on the install, it gives a "cancel" option and backs out of the game when selected. Putting my system into "offline mode" via the system network settings fixed it and the message no longer pops up, allowing me to play the game. While this is annoying for users connected to a network, the point is if you are not, the data does in fact come on the disc and you can play the game without being connected to the internet.

[cybercylon]

I think where the game is released in chapters like the Tell Tale games, you get the first chapter on the disc, and the rest is download once the other chapters are available. I doubt this is unique to the Xbox One though... I assume it works the same way for the PS4 version.

 

I can't think of the games that are like this off of the top of my head.

[matt2d2]

I do love playing 360 games on XB1 from time to time, but "retro" 3d games have not really done it for me! I've played around emulating PS1 and Dreamcast, and damn, those games look TERRIBLE to my eyes today. It'll be good for PS3, and maybe some PS2 era if you're really sweet on some particular titles.

[boxpressed]

The only reason I'm even considering getting an Xbox One is for BC. What I don't know is whether the One X is the one to get for BC, or if the S will suffice.

[matt2d2]

Any XB1 will suffice, BUT there are some 360 games that are XB1 X enhanced, so there will be some benefit to using the X vs standard XB1 or S if they mean anything to you.

[Austin]

Yes, if you can swing it the X will give you the smoothest experience. Fastest load times, best performance, then the titles that are enhanced by it (some 360, some OG Xbox). Either model regardless, the backwards compatibility experience is good.

[Mord]

It's not the installation of the games on the drive I mind... it's the fact that enough of the game has to be installed as a "patch" that the game can't reliably be played if the publisher disappears.

 

While there are certainly plenty of games, particularly by a certain group of big publishers, that have needed patches to make their messes playable or give the rest of the game to you, I've found many games have a patch primarily just for the online components of the game. When the PS4 is dropped by Sony and updates go away, the online portion of the games go away - but since you need Sony's servers for online play anyway it's not really losing anything significant.

 

Best way to see how a game will be affected post-online support, is to (delete the game from your harddrive first if you already have it installed!) disconnect the PS4 from the internet and do a fresh install of the game from the disc to see how it goes. I would expect most games to just install properly and you might not see much of an issue afterwards. Some might crash now and then. Some, like No Man's Sky, will feel like a completely different game given you'll lose a LOT of the content they eventually added to the game - plus it'll crash like crazy, etc.

 

And of course you'll be forever axed off from the DLC on a game. I generally avoid buying most DLC til after I've played a lot of the game to make sure the physical/base game feels like it actually has enough content on it's own. Because I know if I want to play the game again 5-10 years down the road after support is pulled from the console, that's what I'm going to be stuck with. (And it's why I've passed on No Man's Sky physical release even when seeing it as low as 10 bucks. If I saw the digital game for 10 bucks, I'd probably consider it but we know digital is usually the most expensive way to get a game on the consoles these days despite promises by devs/publishers that digital would bring cheaper prices since their costs would go down. )

[juansolo]

I held out a long time before dipping into this generation, I came in with the PS4 slim and Xbox One S (which I sold, then bought again later…). As someone who doesn’t game online there’s a LOT of things about this generation that irk me and why It’ll likely be the last one I bother with.

Day one patches / unfinished / broken games - This is utter BS. I’ve had instances where I’ve bought games then had to wait a day until it’s patched up into a playable state. I don’t see this going away as the way this generation is, it allows publishers to get away with this behaviour.

The sheer size of games - I have 4 f**king terrabytes of HDD strapped onto my PS4! When did that actually become a thing!? The call of ‘well you don’t have to have them all installed’ is fair, if you don’t collect. What happens when they turn off the servers or games go out of license. You have to have them installed if you want to actually play the complete versions of the games as the version on the disc is usually isn’t.

Backwards compatibility - Other than the 10 or so exclusives I have for the Xbone, it’s really the only other reason to own one. If it was all encompassing it’d be magnificent as it would allow me to put my Xbox and 360 away. However, the games all download once you put the disc in… See above for my issues with that.

Current gaming practices - They’re just ruining games. The wheelspins in the last Horizon game removed all progression from gameplay making actually playing the game secondary to the f**king fruit machine mechanic. All to fuel those microtransactions that you just can’t get away from because they’re shoved in your face all the time (even if you don't buy them). It was the straw that broke the camels back for me.

Online single player games - Because games as a service is now in those. We’re not milked enough by all the online services you need to pay for that you now have to pay for shit that’s already in the game… So you basically buy a full price game then continue to pay for content that’s locked away in there. It’s kinda like progression I suppose, except now it’s billable.

All of the above is why I see discless consoles as a simple no to me. Some may argue that it’s only like the PC market, but that’s the same for me. What happens when Steam folds. It’ll happen at some point. The only real way to buy PC games digitally is GoG as you can actually download the game’s installers and archive them (which is exactly what I do…). You are not buying the games with Steam, you’re buying a service, a service that can by it’s nature, end…

I do think it’s a generational thing. People don’t buy music or films any more, they stream low bitrate, poor quality versions of them because it’s convenient. Convenience is who these discless machines will sell to. MS and Sony will LOVE the satellite model. They essentially sell you a set top box and you buy a service to play games. It’s constant revenue. They don’t have to innovate as the market never reaches saturation, so no new hardware is needed to sell it all over again. The losers will of course be the game makers. Much like artists on Spotify. Which is a worry as to what you’ll have left in terms of games long term.

Personally I’m done. I was pretty much done this generation and they way things have gone has just cemented my thoughts on the matter.

Edited April 1, 2019 by juansolo

[juansolo]

I do love playing 360 games on XB1 from time to time, but "retro" 3d games have not really done it for me! I've played around emulating PS1 and Dreamcast, and damn, those games look TERRIBLE to my eyes today. It'll be good for PS3, and maybe some PS2 era if you're really sweet on some particular titles.

 

To be fair PS1 games do look terrible (as do N64) on just about everything other than original hardware and a CRT, and then they're still not that cracking. A lot of old consoles just look bad on panels, those two particularly. The PS2 and Dreamcast however, plug them into a CRT and they're bloody lovely. Indeed, to me that generation of consoles were the pinnacle of console gaming.

[matt2d2]

Damn right you mind reader. 2-4-6 are the best for original cast movies

Off topic I guess, but gotta speak up! ST1 was long, and mostly boring, but at least an attempt was made at making something like the SHOW. ST2 was a great movie, yes, no doubt, but the later movies were just total disasters IMO. ST3 had a few moments, ST4 might as well have been Galaxy Quest, and ST5 was complete drivel. ST6 had some moments too, before it went off the rails with the lame plot of Kirk being framed, sent to prison, etc.

 

I really feel like after ST2, no attempt was made to make movies in the vein of Roddenberry's idea. The producers at the time seemed far more interested in going their own way, and making that future as messed up and dysfunctional as 80s-90's era.

[zzip]

I do love playing 360 games on XB1 from time to time, but "retro" 3d games have not really done it for me! I've played around emulating PS1 and Dreamcast, and damn, those games look TERRIBLE to my eyes today. It'll be good for PS3, and maybe some PS2 era if you're really sweet on some particular titles.

 

Early 3D looked terrible to my eyes even back then too,

 

We had gotten to the point where we could finally make awesome-looking 2D and Isometric games, but no, everything suddenly had to be in 3D and have crappy blob graphics, even games that saw no benefit from 3D.

[Video]

Early 3d I didn't have a problem with, it wasn't till those ultra low resolution textures came into the picture (pun intended) that the looks went to sheer ass.

 

Jag, and 3do (and to a lesser extent snes and genesis) looked fine with their 3d. Psx and 64 decided we needed textures as well as polies, and they simply weren't ready for it. Dreamcast and ps2 had enough ram to run decent resolution textures.

 

Anything beyond that generation looks fine on whatever resolution display was intended at the time.

 

Of course I'm sure like 2600 people who grew up with them will say they have their own charm. Me, I don't care as long as it's fun.

[godslabrat]

Early 3d I didn't have a problem with, it wasn't till those ultra low resolution textures came into the picture (pun intended) that the looks went to sheer ass.

Jag, and 3do (and to a lesser extent snes and genesis) looked fine with their 3d. Psx and 64 decided we needed textures as well as polies, and they simply weren't ready for it. Dreamcast and ps2 had enough ram to run decent resolution textures.

Anything beyond that generation looks fine on whatever resolution display was intended at the time.

Of course I'm sure like 2600 people who grew up with them will say they have their own charm. Me, I don't care as long as it's fun.

PS1 and n64 also generally come down to if you prefer fuzziness or jagginess. Both are aesthetic flaws in their own rights, but it seems people will prefer one to the other, when being forced to choose.

[Flojomojo]

I loved the low polygon, lightly textured, foggy look of the N64. Stuff like Shadows of the Empire or Turok Dinosaur Hunter looked like the SGI demos that were mind blowing lot cool for a few short years.

 

Realistic lighting and textures are so blah in comparison.

[Razzie.P]

I just wish Sony would support the Vita for a few more years. It’s a lovely system.

 

 

I wish your wish would come true.

[phoenixdownita]

.... Stuff like Shadows of the Empire or Tyrol Dinosaur Hunter looked like the SGI demos ...

... I don't think that exists