12 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 37.1 ms ] thread
Isn't that a normal expectation by now? PS3 could play PS2 game discs but not PS1's. It seems to be established since then that a generation would be backwards compatible only with its immediate predecessor (not counting being able to play older games by re-purchasing them as downloadables).
The PS3 can absolutely play PS1 games, but only a few models can play PS2 games.

https://support.playstation.com/s/article/Play-PSone-and-Pla...

But, the PS3 doesn’t play PS1 discs. Only digital repurchased PS1 games from the PS store. Seems misleading to call it backwards compatible, no?
This is wrong, I’ve got clear memories of booting up Legend of Dragoon on my PS3 from the disc. I dont think this was even axed from the later versions of PS3 like PS2 compatibility was
From the support page I linked:

* All PlayStation®3 systems can play most PS One games.

* Certain PS3™ systems have the ability to play disc-based PlayStation®2 software titles (backwards compatible).

* All PS3™ systems have the ability to play downloadable PS One and PlayStation®2 Classics available from the PlayStation™Store.

----------------

It distinguishes between "play[ing] most PS One games" and "play[ing] downloadable PS One ... Classics"

Here's some video proof: https://youtu.be/yg1zHAEdxXA?t=20

That's precisely what samchriswhite and I said... that you can repurchase downloadables but not play discs directly. You can't take your bunch of PS1 discs and use them on the PS3, therefore it's not backwards compatible in that sense.
Nevermind. I misunderstood what you said. I stand corrected. PS3 can play PS1 game discs.
Although it's sad to see backward compatibility getting axed in newer consoles, it does come at a heavy cost [1]. It may make sense for OS like Windows/OSX, but personally I think I would rather have an all-new console without all the baggage, which may or may not add value during the lifetime of the console.

In fact, with most consoles having a lifespan of about 6 years on average [2], I would even say that there is a diminishing return in keeping that baggage around.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility#Costs

[2] https://za.ign.com/ps4/64636/feature/the-5-longest-console-l...

I know backwards compatibility has been used to introduce DRM-defeating vulnerabilities in the past, so for that reason alone I suspect console makers would be hesitant to introduce more backwards compatibility than absolutely necessary.
Few thought it would in the first place. This is just more clickbait—-like those articles that pretend that it won’t be compatible with most PS4 titles. Come on, you know it’s not going to be any less compatible than the PS4 pro.

Someone has an agenda.

A console that can't even play red dead redemption is a tough sell.
Aside from freeing up space used by my growing collection of older consoles, I'm not convinced full backwards compatibility for PS3 and earlier games should be a hard requirement for PS5. However, all of my older games are physical purchases and I've only recently been blessed with a fast enough home connection to make downloading games practical.

If there is enough demand, I hope that it will be possible to add PS5 support for emulating older downloadable games purchased from the PlayStation Store.

I'm personally more inclined to pay (again) for a quality remastered version on a next gen console. I've enjoyed replaying some of the PS4 remastered games with higher definition graphics (Last of Us, God of War 3, CoD: Modern Warfare, Uncharted Collection, ...) and I still aim for Platinum trophies for my favourites.

Sony has also said "We believe that the overwhelming majority of the 4,000+ PS4 titles will be playable on PS5" (https://blog.us.playstation.com/2020/03/18/unveiling-new-det...) which hopefully covers most of the games I've bought in the last 6 or so years.