ps4 looks like it may be becoming backwards compatible

[Lokis Maliki]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25645867

this is pretty cool. currently only for ps3 games, but it looks like they have the eventual ability to host others... such as shadows of the colossus *fingers crossed*

the fact that it looks like you could go console free is awesome as well.

they mention a similar system in the UK. has anyone tried it? how does it run?

 

[Lokis Maliki]

yeah, there is that. i am hoping that it will improve with time cause it sounds like a vast improvement over how things are right now.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I predicted cloud-based console experience on TV about 5 years ago. And I still hate the idea because it requires games to be services which takes away every bit of control from the player. I'd rather have a TV that has a built-in console hardware. That would be awesome.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

First off, this isn't really backwards compatibility. Backwards compatibility, in the traditional sense at least, is the ability to simply play a game you own from a previous console without having to jump through too many hoops. What they're talking about here is game streaming, which is something very different.

The reason the PS4 and XBone don't have backwards compatibility is because it's expensive. Most of the time, it involves basically having the previous generation hardware inside the new console. This increases production costs, which invariably makes the system more expensive.

Streaming is a clever way to retain most of the same functionality as having backwards compatibility would without increasing production costs, but it has many problems that make it far inferior to having actual backwards compatibility. The biggest is that not only do you have to have a perfect internet connection that never gets interrupted, but you're also entirely dependent on Sony's servers remaining up constantly. Plus, if Sony's servers ever go down for good, you will have absolutely no way to play those games you payed for. On top of that, there's the issue of latency, which may be improved in the future, but will never really go away. Finally, game streaming uses a huge amount of bandwidth, so it's pretty much a no go for the very large amount of people with bandwidth caps.

 

[Lokis Maliki]

So, its like steam?


I haven't owned a console in years, but this sounds like a way that i could play those games without one. Hope they fix the issues with it because I would like to play the last of us and buying a console isn't happening.

 

[josemlopes]

So, its like steam?


I haven't owned a console in years, but this sounds like a way that i could play those games without one. Hope they fix the issues with it because I would like to play the last of us and buying a console isn't happening.

Not really, its more like Onlive. With Steam you download the games and have their files running on your computer, in here the game is being run somewhere else and you only get the image on your screen.

You cant do anything to those files (althought since these are consoles you wouldnt anyway) because they are never sent to you meaning some lack of ownership (for example, you cant download a PS2 game and keep it stored on your console to play when someday you loose internet connection)

EDIT: I still like the idea since it does allow us to play those games without needing a super expensive system. I know that the internet in the USA is terrible but one day it wont be and the sooner this system starts the better (how many different versions of MediEvil have people already bought? At least this one can be their final since the system and account will probably exist after a PS5 comes out)

 

[lapan]

As long as you have to rebuy/rent games and you are affected by latency it's not really a valid alternative to owning a ps3.