http://n4g.com/news/2167252/rumor-remedy-games-is-working-on-quantum-break-2

.

You mean by changing literally everything about all the other games in the franchise that people used that argument against?

@Shewgenja:

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2007/10/jack_tretton_says_dropping_bc_/

Jack Tretton Says Dropping BC Wasn't For Cost Measures

If you thought Sony was removing the PS2 guts out of the system, saving them gobs of cash and passing the savings on to you, late adopters, maybe you should think again. According to the Wall Street Journal's paraphrasing of SCEA boss Jack Tretton, the removal of PS2 backward compatibility and other components isn't "dramatically reducing Sony's cost of manufacturing" on Sony's behemoth console.

He doesnt say that they got rid of BC to keep people buying PS2s. That part was my (very practical) speculation. Instead, he gives an obvious bullshiite explanation that....

Instead, the handicapping of the PS3 was part of an effort to "encourage buyers of the entry-level PlayStation 3 to purchase more games designed specifically for the new system". If only there were some other ways of doing that outside of ripping out the PS3's ability to play PS2 games better than an actual PS2 in so many cases.

If we were to take this trump-esque saving face obvious lie explanation at face value, then BC was in such high demand, that they had to take it out of the system just to get people to play actual PS3 games. A statement that would contradict their stated position on it now. But, we know that capitalism doesnt work that way.

I didnt see your edit, but thats not the reason Sony removed backwards compatability. Jack Tretton even said himself that it cost them very little to impliment it (even with the hardware in there). They removed it because they wanted people to keep buying PS2s, which were not only selling like crazy deep into last gen, but were printing money at an incredibly high markup.

Basically, every PS2 sold = $80 in Sonys pocket. Meanwhile PS3s were selling at an incredible loss. They didnt want people to stop buying PS2s and lose that revenue stream.

@Shewgenja:

Its just being framed as if Microsoft is expending precious resources that would otherwise go to making games. It costs almost nothing for them to do this, lol.

Lets be honest. The only reason this objectively valuable feature that costs almost nothing and little manpower for Microsoft to impliment is being attacked so strongly by cows, is because Sony is not doing it. You are attacking an objective strength that costs nothing, for no reason other than because Sony isnt doing it.

Its like when Cows used to pretend they "didnt even want" cross game chat, in-game XMB, or Trophies. You would be praising this feature if Sony showed a similar initiative and not Microsoft.

Look, troll xbox all day long, boast about God of War, call xbox "no game box", but when it comes to things like this, kindly stfu and step aside because I do not want Sony listening to you.

I say this as a person with no Xbox One, and a PS3 right next to my PS4. There are several games that I missed last gen that I do not want to boot up an old machine for, and play on a shitty controller, with an inferior experience, worse UI, framerate, not be able to use headphones, etc. More importantly, there are legacy PSOne and PS2 classics that Sony hasnt ported to PS4 that are on PS3, some that I and many others would like to go back to, and some to play for the first time. The Persona games, for one. All of which are on PS3 PSP and Vita.

There isnt even an excuse for those, such as the difficulty of emulating the cell processor. Sony already has working PSone, PS2, and PSP emulators on PS4.

Average age of the gamer is increasing. This is the first generation that (at least in the mainstream space) not only grew up playing games, but the games industry grew up with them. The industry FOLLOWED them into adulthood, rather than those people growing out of them. So they have more disposable income.

These people belonged to the last generation that will ever have had to convince their parents to buy them expensive consoles that were once considered "toys". In the same way you never had to "sell" the concept of owning a TV or a DVD or VHS player to your parents growing up, and convince them to buy you one. Your kids wont have to do that with videogames.

These consoles will just be an automatic utility that millenial parents already have.

The most important thing I care about at the press conference is Death Stranding.

Im a lifelong MGS fanboy (well, since childhood) and I personally subscribe to the Kojima Ruse Cruise theory, that Death Stranding is going to be revealed to be Metal Gear Solid Zero, and that the entire Kojima-Konami drama was fake, and Kojima is going to pull the biggest troll job in gaming history. Mads Mikkelsens character is as clear as day The Sorrow from MGS3. Im most interested in seeing what happens reguarding Kojima and Death stranding. Whatever it is, hoax or not, we'll get closure on whether or not we'll ever get MGSV chapter 3.

Seeing more of Ghost of Tsushima, Last of Us 2, and Days Gone.

Seeing whats next for Halo, in whatever form its present at E3.

Also, Cyberpunk 2077.

This thread is stupid.

Besides, Microsoft has actually had a buyout pact with Nvidia since 2003, and they have the right of first refusal if anyone else tries to buy them. So if they were going to buy anyone (which they wouldnt, because the premise of this thread is stupid) it would be Nvidia.

Yea, I'm calling fake on this. "Rebooting" Halo? really? Why wouldnt it just be a spin off? That series has like 24 novels that take place at several points and places in the universe that could be the basis for a new game.

Also, Joanna Dark? Even if true (which I dont believe), not interested. Not interested in more reboots and remasters, and retreading Gen 5 franchises for "nostalgia". Make new IPs.