The lack of backwards compatibility/support for older games seems to be your main issue.
My opinion, BC is good but remakes and remasters are better.
My opinion, BC is good but remakes and remasters are better.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Why does Sony seemingly not respect its own legacy and history?
- Thread starter Deleted member 249
- Start date
It's largely the same reason the VC was abandoned by Nintendo, in my opinion.
They've made significant investments to get Mario Tennis Aces, Super Mario Party, Kirby All Star Allies, Labo, and Pokemon and Smash this year. Just because you don't care for the games doesn't mean Nintendo has not made decisions and investments to publish games each year.
I think part of it may have to deal with the fact that Sony's game division has a lot more turnover in leadership than something like Nintendo. There's more of an expectation to bring the next new thing to the table with Sony whereas Nintendo lionizes its own past and rarely puts out multiple iterations of their products (games) within the same console cycle.
That quote by Jim Ryan is so out of context it's hilarious. He was at an event that happened to feature several of the Gran Turismo games from PS1 to current at the time. I think it was GT6? And he was commenting on how it's inferior not just graphically but in almost every way from physics to car selection, etc.
It wasn't a slight at old games, it was pointing out how things have improved vastly. Outside of nostalgia I don't see why anyone would play GTA3 over GTAV either.
It wasn't a slight at old games, it was pointing out how things have improved vastly. Outside of nostalgia I don't see why anyone would play GTA3 over GTAV either.
That hasn't been the case for a majority of the industry, and still isn't, except for Nintendo (which is not even clear cut, considering the miserable way Switch has handled it) and Microsoft (who only recently started doing it). Maybe it should be the standard going forward, but it hasn't really been a big talking point until the last few years.
Well some games run better through backwards compatibility, if I remember right. Honestly, I'm crossing my fingers that Nintendo and Sony do the same with their next systems
Ok, cool. What about all the games that don't get remakes and remasters? Like, for example, what about literally every Ratchet and Clank except the original (even then, the PS4 game is a reimagining, and not really the same game)?
They aren't remasters they just bump up the resolution. When GOW3 Remastered turned out to be just a resolution bump people called it lazy.
I mean they're not called remasters on the box but they are remastered.
I doubt that's the reason. They've barely done any remaster/remakes themselves. The vast majority are third-party. The majority of Sony's own legacy games remain unplayable on PS4.
Its not just a resolution bump, most games run better as well.
Can you name a few? I don't remember Microsoft giving away remasters for free.
Several 360 games are remastered through backwards comparability, and if you already have the discs, it's definitely a free remaster.
I've gotten a bunch of free remasters on PS4 with Cross Buy. Journey, flOw, Flower, Escape Plan, Spelunky, and tons more were all free for having purchased them on PS3 or Vita with nice upgrades.
He's talking about 4K emulation on X1X. Some games are updated to run in 4K on X1X, such as RDR. These updates are free to those who owned the games on a prior system.
Yeah I would like that too. BC games are emulated, they're not remastered.
BC would solve that issue for current gen owners. Sony might surprise us with the PS5.
Oh of course, I just think the poster meant that the enhancements the emulation offers is like free remastering
They didnt give anything out its just a product of Xbox's BC initiative. When we bought Last of 2 it was classified as remastered.
MS updated games like Gears of War 2 and 3 FREE to 4k even. Not even 1080p, 4K. Thats remastering.
Did you forget about Mario Tennis Aces and Super Mario Party?
And what about the remasters that are worse than the original versions? Jak and Daxter Collection, Silent Hill Collection, ones like that.
There wasn't much of a fuss until a couple of years, I think it'll be addressed on PS5 at this point, maybe it won't but I'd find it weird if it's not.
It doesn't solve anything if it's just PS4 BC. That's all I think we're getting. PS1-3 BC seems like more and more of a longshot when people buy Classic Consoles in droves, or indeed people like yourself state you'd rather have remasters than BC, even though that means hundreds (if not thousands) of games will not make the transition forward.
I don't think anyone's going to disagree with this, but it doesn't mean Sony holds its legacy in contempt.
I think it depends on where you are. As an American PlayStation's legacy is largely 3rd party and almost entirely multiplatform now. I have more nostalgia associated with the Nintendo 64. So to me there isn't much they can leverage and there isn't legacy to respect. I had a PS1 and I mostly remember wanting a Nintendo 64. Even asking my coworkers, most people associate with Nintendo aged 20-28 and remember that stuff. I've always felt Sony was stronger in Europe. Plus they half ass a lot recently. The Vita is half assed, it seems like the PS Classic is half assed, the Pro feels half assed it's I dunno, you can't respect what you don't really have imo, especially with Xbox making some default exclusives multiplatform.
This is a pretty ignorant thing to say on an enthusiast board. Plenty of us care.
I feel like their approach to some legacy ideas is something fairweather and not consistent, like they suddenly think "oh shit, we could leverage this idea for cash moneys, right get it done as quick as possible"
Then when things don't quite meet expectations as a result, they scratch their heads and retreat back to normality, but that's normally more for when they're following some established legacy trend like the PS1 classic and PSASBR.
They DO manage things well enough elsewhere, PS3 era had mostly quality compilations of their classics for solid prices, I think the lesson is they do it better when it's their own idea?
Then when things don't quite meet expectations as a result, they scratch their heads and retreat back to normality, but that's normally more for when they're following some established legacy trend like the PS1 classic and PSASBR.
They DO manage things well enough elsewhere, PS3 era had mostly quality compilations of their classics for solid prices, I think the lesson is they do it better when it's their own idea?
The big different here that people tend to overlook is that the first Smash Brothers was a budget game that was never meant to leave Japan. It wasn't meant to be anything but a cute title at the end of the N64's life. And Melee was built in 18 months, not enough time to market third-parties. In fact, they had to turned Snake down for Melee.
Come on, isn't this just gift fodder for the Christmas market?
Anyone who is really nostalgic for retro gaming would surely track down a proper PS1 and have an authentic experience (console upside down to make the cd's work included!). None of these mini consoles offer quite the same experience I remember because a lot of the games that were big, or part of the total experience, were third party games. Nintendo have had me closest to parting with my cash for an SNES.
Whilst I accept that to some, nostalgia and backwards compatibility is important, it's not a huge deal for me, but if it was, I'd track down original machines and software.
About ten years ago, a mate and I spent about £40 on a PS2 and a selection of games for a weekend jaunt down memory lane.
Even then, the nostalgia quickly dissipated when we were underwhelmed by the experience vs what we had become accustomed to.
It's weird that unlike music, books and films (which endlessly get reissued and remastered and repurchased) there's a really different attitude toward video games. I was trying to put my finger on why. Still not sure.
Ultimately, Sony will be more concerned with flogging PS4 over the holiday than the PS Classic. And that's exactly what they should be doing.
Anyone who is really nostalgic for retro gaming would surely track down a proper PS1 and have an authentic experience (console upside down to make the cd's work included!). None of these mini consoles offer quite the same experience I remember because a lot of the games that were big, or part of the total experience, were third party games. Nintendo have had me closest to parting with my cash for an SNES.
Whilst I accept that to some, nostalgia and backwards compatibility is important, it's not a huge deal for me, but if it was, I'd track down original machines and software.
About ten years ago, a mate and I spent about £40 on a PS2 and a selection of games for a weekend jaunt down memory lane.
Even then, the nostalgia quickly dissipated when we were underwhelmed by the experience vs what we had become accustomed to.
It's weird that unlike music, books and films (which endlessly get reissued and remastered and repurchased) there's a really different attitude toward video games. I was trying to put my finger on why. Still not sure.
Ultimately, Sony will be more concerned with flogging PS4 over the holiday than the PS Classic. And that's exactly what they should be doing.
It's not a self fullfilling prohecy because I love backwards compatibility but I also recongize that not everyone does and It was also lack of interest but I also have no doubt the PS5 will have backwards compatibility with how libaries have evolved with digital being so big.
They have a huge legacy, some of the biggest consoles in history, Those are just part of it but again them remaking games is a good thing when companies put the care into them.
Pokemon and Smash are really the only big titles for the year and that's a pretty lacking year. it's an issue and one that shouldn't be glossed over but also that's not the point of this thread.
I agree to some degree but like...idk.....I want new experiences and want the past to stay in the past?
I think nostalgia is such a cheap tactic and I actually thing it's more shitter when Sony does it. Let that be a Nintendo thing, and sure let that be a Microsoft thing....but idk, when Sony does it...not only is it cheap but tasteless and tacky. They are capable of being better than that. I just hold them to a different standard when it comes to this. Sony doesn't quite have the strength in order titles anyways to really milk this but to try just seems whack. The games that matter have been remastered and that's all I care about. The PlayStation classic is tacky and they don't need that.
I think nostalgia is such a cheap tactic and I actually thing it's more shitter when Sony does it. Let that be a Nintendo thing, and sure let that be a Microsoft thing....but idk, when Sony does it...not only is it cheap but tasteless and tacky. They are capable of being better than that. I just hold them to a different standard when it comes to this. Sony doesn't quite have the strength in order titles anyways to really milk this but to try just seems whack. The games that matter have been remastered and that's all I care about. The PlayStation classic is tacky and they don't need that.
RDR looks amazing on the One X but I wouldn't call it a remaster. The underlying code is untouched and it is still capped at the original frame-rate.
It's X enhanced emulation. Don't confuse that with remasters.
I think they'll. BC isn't much of a fuss even now, yes it gets a lot of attention on forums but I don't think it's a big deal outside of a few big names like Call of Duty and RDR. That said, I'm glad Microsoft is supporting it.
I'm talking about classic BC on PS5. PS4 is a given.
I whole hardheartedly disagree with this 100%. Sony in the beginning didn't have much of an original identity, just that at the time third party games were releasing on it exclusively because of external reasons with other platforms. They were getting games like Tomb Raider, crash, spyro and the didn't come from internally owned studios. Much of Playstations big known franchises in the early PS1 days came from outside.
But games like medievil and the likes they do own. I would like to ask how much you think Sony spent in remaking Shadow of the Colossus? How much they are spending on Medievil remake. Wipeout Collection. They had some history in PS1 games but alot of them came very late, like Legend of dragoon and were super expensive. Ape escape is another one I would like to see to be honest.
But the issue you are seeing is their heritage of these classic games is tied to a lot of IP ownership issues. I feel they do care about their heritage if the latest couple years has suggested. Medievil was not a huge seller yet here we are getting a straight up remake. Crash though they don't own the IP, I believe it was them who approached Activision in trying to get something made that embraced the classics.
If they didn't care about their heritage I don't think we would see games that have not been seen for a long time. Wipeout was dead by the time psp came around, but they made a collection that looks amazing and it priced appropriately. When looking at Playstation all stars, there's a game that has it's own issues. Mainly in character rights. Something they can not control for some. Also Playstation has found success in not relying 100% on the same franchise with their developers. Something Nintendo is slowly coming around too with the likes of ARMS. Look at each gen, Naughty dog had a new series each one. With last of us part 2 being the final one for that series until they start something new. Look at all their studios actually. They have put out ton's of sequels and sometimes new iterations. Not everything sells and works out. AKA starhawk, Socom 4, Twisted metal PS3.
They try but their business for the platform isn't tied to just a couple franchise/properties like most of NIntendo's whole business is. Which is the underlying issue. Should Sony be more pro active in preserving their legacy? Yes. Has that in any way impacted their ability to produce amazing IP's, and adding to their overall library? No.
PS1: origin
PS2: plays PS1 games out the box
PSP: plays PS1 games
PS3: Plays PS2 & PS1 games out the box
PS VIta/Vita TV: Plays PS1 & PSP games
PS4: Does not play PS1, PS2, PS3 games out the box
Internet: why does sony hate their legacy?
Remasters & Xbox BC has *really* made people go crazy over this topic. To the point of big reach takes. When PS3 removed the PS2 BC, the reaction was nowhere close to this. At the end of the day, people buy consoles to play new games. BC is a nice addition. But now it's just gotten to the point where people act like BC is used by the majority and not an extremely small minority.
PS2: plays PS1 games out the box
PSP: plays PS1 games
PS3: Plays PS2 & PS1 games out the box
PS VIta/Vita TV: Plays PS1 & PSP games
PS4: Does not play PS1, PS2, PS3 games out the box
Internet: why does sony hate their legacy?
Remasters & Xbox BC has *really* made people go crazy over this topic. To the point of big reach takes. When PS3 removed the PS2 BC, the reaction was nowhere close to this. At the end of the day, people buy consoles to play new games. BC is a nice addition. But now it's just gotten to the point where people act like BC is used by the majority and not an extremely small minority.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say they don't respect their legacy games but they clearly care less about preserving past games, their fans blindly support their decision here, and that sucks. I just wish I could play my classic game collection on the PS4 like I could on my PS3. There's no reason it can't happen outside of lack of interest from the company. Hopefully they make things right with the PS5, but I feel like we'll just get PS4 BC support and that's it. I'd love to be wrong here though. To be able to play my PSone collection on the PS5, at higher resolutions, would be greatly appreciated.