Sony Unveils PS3 to PS4 Software Discounts

[The_Echo]

This is such a good idea, and actually really good for the lifespan of multiplayer titles.

Though since I prefer physical copies myself, I'd probably just wait until I have a PS4 and grab the PS4 version at (hopefully) a smaller price anyway.

 

[shemoanscazrex3]

I see why people are upset about this but lets say if I buy a physical copy of a game on PC and its not a steam license. Then I buy a Mac and still have to buy that game over. Or when I bought Counter Strike and Borderlands 2 on PS3, I later sold my PS3 and wanted to buy those games on my Mac, no discount at all. So I'm happy Sony is doing this, sure if it were free it would be better but some money has to be made on the updated engine, packaging, and physical disc.

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

Funny how one home console implements it and suddenly it's the holy grail of gaming for over a decade later.

Funny how people are shown progress in 2 of their successive machines and actually want more of it down the line, and are upset that it is removed, simply for marketing techniques to weasel more money from consumers without doing any work to earn it.

Sorry, backwards compatibility (or lack there-of) is a deal-breaker for me. And what happens with the inevitable PS5? Will you get the chance to buy all your games again, and all the network games will become "incompatible" due to hardware issues that they themselves choose to implement?

 

[shrekfan246]

Funny how one home console implements it and suddenly it's the holy grail of gaming for over a decade later.

Funny how people are shown progress in 2 of their successive machines and actually want more of it down the line, and are upset that it is removed, simply for marketing techniques to weasel more money from consumers without doing any work to earn it.

Sorry, backwards compatibility (or lack there-of) is a deal-breaker for me. And what happens with the inevitable PS5? Will you get the chance to buy all your games again, and all the network games will become "incompatible" due to hardware issues that they themselves choose to implement?

So I'm led to believe you never bought a SNES, Nintendo 64, Gamecube, Sega Genesis/Megadrive, Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast? What about the Playstation or first Xbox, which had nothing to be backwards compatible with?

You could always, I dunno, not get rid of old consoles. And when they inevitably die, you'd likely have to spend money replacing them/your games anyway, so what's the difference between that and spending money for a "new" version compatible with newer hardware?

Also, insinuating that they're twirling evil curly mustaches behind black curtains and scheming on how they can use different hardware to swindle people out of money for old games is the height of paranoia. For one, re-releasing games for new systems often attracts new customers to old IPs; I should know, that's why I ever actually played Metal Gear Solid. It's not just them trying to resell games to people who already bought them, as egomaniacal as gamers like to be.

For two, do you really expect hardware manufacturers to use the same architecture for two decades? New technology is always going to present new problems with old software. That's why there's an entire digital distribution website dedicated almost solely to updating games from 10+ years ago to be playable on modern PCs.

Lack of backwards compatibility is a deal-breaker for you? Good for you. Personally, I buy new consoles to play new games, not to continue playing the ones I've already completed. It's nice when it's included in whatever capacity, but otherwise if I still want to play PS3 or PS2 or Xbox or N64 games, I can just pull out those systems again.

 

[Lord_Jaroh]

Funny how one home console implements it and suddenly it's the holy grail of gaming for over a decade later.

Funny how people are shown progress in 2 of their successive machines and actually want more of it down the line, and are upset that it is removed, simply for marketing techniques to weasel more money from consumers without doing any work to earn it.

Sorry, backwards compatibility (or lack there-of) is a deal-breaker for me. And what happens with the inevitable PS5? Will you get the chance to buy all your games again, and all the network games will become "incompatible" due to hardware issues that they themselves choose to implement?

So I'm led to believe you never bought a SNES, Nintendo 64, Gamecube, Sega Genesis/Megadrive, Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast? What about the Playstation or first Xbox, which had nothing to be backwards compatible with?

Non-issue. Backwards compatibility did not exist in it's current form until PS1 to PS2 made it a "big deal", and considering how convenient and consumer friendly it was to do it, people expected it and got it in the first iteration of the PS3. I can play my entire library of PS1 to PS3 games on one system. Is this not a good thing? People go crazy over emulators that allow them to play the old games on one system. Why do you think that is?

You could always, I dunno, not get rid of old consoles. And when they inevitably die, you'd likely have to spend money replacing them/your games anyway, so what's the difference between that and spending money for a "new" version compatible with newer hardware?

I have a large collection of games. Are you saying that when my PS3 dies, I should upgrade all of my games to PS4 versions? How about games that don't get redone on the new system? Do you think I'm going to find a redone version of Armored Core Master of Arena compatible with the PS4? Instead I need to find an old system that will be out of print or prone to self-destruction. Or just never play those games again. Sorry, there is a reason why I keep my older games that may shock you: I like to play them! And I would like the convenience of having one system hooked to my tv for cleanliness and cat/kid friendly reasons.

Also, insinuating that they're twirling evil curly mustaches behind black curtains and scheming on how they can use different hardware to swindle people out of money for old games is the height of paranoia. For one, re-releasing games for new systems often attracts new customers to old IPs; I should know, that's why I ever actually played Metal Gear Solid. It's not just them trying to resell games to people who already bought them, as egomaniacal as gamers like to be.

Sorry, they are in the business to make money, and when presented with an easy way to do so, they will do it. It is why they took backwards compatibility away, one to cut costs on a piece of hardware that was losing them money, and on the flipside to release new games that they don't have to do any work to release! More often then not, they don't even try to do a new cover for the games that are collection rereleases; they simply paste all the covers squished together and voila! It's good short-term business sense. The problem is, they are not a future-looking company that cares about its current customers. They only care about the mythical audience that they "could" get if they changed a few things (often at the expense of the customers they already have).

For two, do you really expect hardware manufacturers to use the same architecture for two decades? New technology is always going to present new problems with old software. That's why there's an entire digital distribution website dedicated almost solely to updating games from 10+ years ago to be playable on modern PCs.

Which you can't do with any of your old console titles. Thus they become unplayable unless you have an older machine. If you are a Dreamcast fan, good luck in the future...

Lack of backwards compatibility is a deal-breaker for you? Good for you. Personally, I buy new consoles to play new games, not to continue playing the ones I've already completed. It's nice when it's included in whatever capacity, but otherwise if I still want to play PS3 or PS2 or Xbox or N64 games, I can just pull out those systems again.

Good for you. Different strokes for different folks. Let me ask you something: What is to keep me, the loyal Sony customer, from simply jumping ship to XBox or Ouya or WiiU or whatever other system if the PS4 does not let me play my current library? What is the advantage to staying with Sony? Before it was an easy answer: I can continue playing my old games until something I wanted came out. Thus I bought the new system each time, at launch. Now, there is zero reason for me to buy a new system, until there is something that comes out I may want, which may never happen, or may even happen on a competitor's system. Instead, I will go to that system, and "start again", and they will have lost a customer who spent a lot of money with them.

 

[Dragonbums]

So it's taking advantage of people who bought the PS3 game of a game that is also coming out on the PS4, by making users pay again for the same game but on a different system with a "heavily discounted price"

Well ain't that just the cutest scheme I ever heard.

If that's the case, then I might as well just wait for the PS4 to come out before I buy the game.
I see no sense in paying $60.00 for a game that comes out on the PS3, then spending $350.00 for a new console, and because said games is also on that console, spend X amount of money once again, to get the same game(s) on my new console.

If this is successful, I won't be surprised if newer iterations of consoles in the future will pull the "we can't do BC" and then implement this model to rake more money out of people.

And honestly, it surprises me that a good lot of Escapist users on here- supposedly notorious for smelling bullshit from a mile away, are generally okay with this.

Hurah.