Screw you sony

I think, while unfortunate, it's a natural byproduct of the architecture they used in the previous generation.

For XBox360 <-> xbox one, the general idea is that the PowerPC chipset instructions could be "recompiled" into their x86 equivalents (with some work...). I'm assuming every game that MS is "OK'ing" for backwards compatibility will have to be redownloaded or have to support some kind of shim/sandboxing emulation layer.

For Sony, it's not going to be that easy... I think while the underlying CPU is also PowerPC instructions, the Cell architecture utilized additional chips that would need to be emulated as well. Getting this done correctly to the level necessary (cycle accurate emulators _are hard_) is a huge undertaking.

It'd be nice if inserting the a disc into the system "verified" you had a physical copy so that you can get a digital copy of game X through the PS Now system... but i doubt that's gonna happen

just my $.02

Honestly I don't get the whole outrage over backwards compatibility. People complaining they have to pay to play games they own? Don't throw away your old console then. I still have all of my old consoles (including 2 original gameboy bricks... 2 cuz one doesn't work and I don't have the heart to toss it). Aside from the original NES (and even then I hear they are stable outside of NA, that only NA has the crappy versions)).

The thing about new consoles is that they are kinda expensive to many people. Being able to retail at a lower price is very compelling, and they just can't magically make something backwards compatible without more production and material cost. People IMO act like backwards compatibility is just something they'd have to think about and it will somehow get done without affecting the price of the console.

Frankly, I'd rather have a not backwards compatible console for 400 bucks than one that is backwards compatible for 500 bucks...Not to mention all that extra needed hardware will make it heavier, and probably larger and hotter (and less durable). If you already own the older games, you should own the older console too, and I don't see why you would want to pay extra for the new console just so it can run things that you should be able to run anyway using the old hardware you should have since you apparently own games for it.

Yeah that's easy to say but I know a lot of people who can't afford to keep both consoles. some people need to sell their old one to get the new one... but bottom line I just don't like how sony is just flipping off the people who have asked for this feature since they first launched.

if you are not one of those people than it's no big deal.

They removed backward compatibility from all recent PS3s. If you bought one now, it wouldn't have it.

This line wasn't clear, which is why I responded how I did.

Actually, I can't afford a ps4 whether I keep my ps3 or not...well I suppose I could if I sold things I like but no. I'll just wait a few years, the price will go down and I'll be able to have both (as well as my ps2 and ps1). Like I said though, if they had included backwards compatibility, hardware and production costs on the ps4 would be higher, and likely the sales price of the console would also probably be a good 100 bucks more or so, so would you really even save money in the end? Somehow I doubt a ps3 sells for significantly more than the added price of the ps4 would if it had those features.

Also, that's just my own reason why I think demanding backwards compatibility is silly, that's completely dismissing the fact the ps3 IS a horribly complicated machine that very likely would be incredibly difficult to stuff in a ps4 without practically having a full ps3 inside the ps4. As far as I know, sony has never been proven to lie in these kinds of matters like microsoft did about the kinect being needed, so why doubt their word?

Hey, you.  I have an important question for you.

In FFTactics, did you use TG Cid?