So people like myself got their hopes up about backwards compatibility on PS5 and Sony hasn't said boo about it. It's looking at this point like it was all rumor and scuttlebutt. Either that, or a shared psychic fever dream, distributed from the future by the nascent, as-yet-hidden, sentient AI to be developed in secret by Ken Kutaragi.
I can't stop seeing the over-matte on his neck there...
Anyway... it's no surprise that long-time Playstation gamers were never going to get what they want anyway: the ability to play their already-purchased libraries by just popping them in. After all, not even XBox gamers, with all that platform's progress and efforts towards backwards compatibility this generation, got that: probably a bit more than half of my 360 games will play on my XBox One, and just a smattering of my OG Xbox library came over. If it didn't have "Star Wars" on the box, it didn't have much of a chance.
Oh no, of course not! Never any love for Galleon, eh?
This is of course all because of licensing, and all the renegotiations necessary to allow MS to be able to offer these games over their digital storefronts for purchase, providing some revenue that can justify all the efforts made. And of course the number of purchases of Galleon will not rival those of something with Star Wars in the name. Arguably, this generation, backwards compatibility became an effort for Microsoft more so because it was a feature lacking in Sony's offering, than for the staggering revenue they made selling 360 and OG Xbox games. Just speculating on that tho.
The knock-on effect of this is that collectors and long-time fans of a platform don't really get what they want: the ability to play their current library legally on current hardware. Also, when it comes to software availability and preservation, nothing obscure or weird (i.e. something that won't guaranteed sell again) gets pulled forward into compatibility. There are some exceptions. You can play Batman: Arkham Origins on an Xbox One through backwards compatibility even though you can't buy the game through the XBox Store digitally: only the disc will work for you. (Anyone know any more of these?)
But, largely, if the game can't be relicensed for sale on current digital storefronts, you won't be able to play said game on current platform hardware, legally. So, retro platform fans roll to PC emulators, to really enjoy their old libraries. And somehow the number of people who prefer and use this solution... doesn't seem like a lost opportunity to platform holders? Isn't money left on the table?
How much revenue could you move by actually giving collectors and long-time fans what they want? Why not sell us an officially-supported emulator, through the digital storefront, that is title-independent, runs our disc libraries, and is just a product on its own for us to buy? If it takes a certain amount of revenue to cover the cost of just such an effort, isn't it a conceivable business strategy to place this niche-software at a price-point that covers those costs?
This must, on some level, at least be conceivably legal from a licensing level because we've seen Sony do it before with software emulation of PS2 software in mid-generation PS3's like the 80GB, as well as Nintendo supporting original DS games on 3DS, GBA games on DS, etc. I'm aware of some laser and licensing issue with media, CDs on PS1 and DVDs on PS2, etc. Yet, I'm convinced the only reason it isn't offered flat-rate is that all companies are under directive to turn software into subscription-based revenue streams, and they must offer a library to get consumers to go for that, and that takes them back to all the software relicensing.
They can still do that, and still offer a straight-up emulator package those of us with libraries could buy. If they did, what would you pay for it?
I can't stop seeing the over-matte on his neck there...
Anyway... it's no surprise that long-time Playstation gamers were never going to get what they want anyway: the ability to play their already-purchased libraries by just popping them in. After all, not even XBox gamers, with all that platform's progress and efforts towards backwards compatibility this generation, got that: probably a bit more than half of my 360 games will play on my XBox One, and just a smattering of my OG Xbox library came over. If it didn't have "Star Wars" on the box, it didn't have much of a chance.
Oh no, of course not! Never any love for Galleon, eh?
This is of course all because of licensing, and all the renegotiations necessary to allow MS to be able to offer these games over their digital storefronts for purchase, providing some revenue that can justify all the efforts made. And of course the number of purchases of Galleon will not rival those of something with Star Wars in the name. Arguably, this generation, backwards compatibility became an effort for Microsoft more so because it was a feature lacking in Sony's offering, than for the staggering revenue they made selling 360 and OG Xbox games. Just speculating on that tho.
The knock-on effect of this is that collectors and long-time fans of a platform don't really get what they want: the ability to play their current library legally on current hardware. Also, when it comes to software availability and preservation, nothing obscure or weird (i.e. something that won't guaranteed sell again) gets pulled forward into compatibility. There are some exceptions. You can play Batman: Arkham Origins on an Xbox One through backwards compatibility even though you can't buy the game through the XBox Store digitally: only the disc will work for you. (Anyone know any more of these?)
But, largely, if the game can't be relicensed for sale on current digital storefronts, you won't be able to play said game on current platform hardware, legally. So, retro platform fans roll to PC emulators, to really enjoy their old libraries. And somehow the number of people who prefer and use this solution... doesn't seem like a lost opportunity to platform holders? Isn't money left on the table?
How much revenue could you move by actually giving collectors and long-time fans what they want? Why not sell us an officially-supported emulator, through the digital storefront, that is title-independent, runs our disc libraries, and is just a product on its own for us to buy? If it takes a certain amount of revenue to cover the cost of just such an effort, isn't it a conceivable business strategy to place this niche-software at a price-point that covers those costs?
This must, on some level, at least be conceivably legal from a licensing level because we've seen Sony do it before with software emulation of PS2 software in mid-generation PS3's like the 80GB, as well as Nintendo supporting original DS games on 3DS, GBA games on DS, etc. I'm aware of some laser and licensing issue with media, CDs on PS1 and DVDs on PS2, etc. Yet, I'm convinced the only reason it isn't offered flat-rate is that all companies are under directive to turn software into subscription-based revenue streams, and they must offer a library to get consumers to go for that, and that takes them back to all the software relicensing.
They can still do that, and still offer a straight-up emulator package those of us with libraries could buy. If they did, what would you pay for it?
