Tretton would have liked backwards compatibility in PS3

pjmaybe, for what it’s worth, I wouldn’t say no to BC either. But I’m not about to act some stroppy 13 year old who makes demands and then slams his bedroom door and sulks when he doesn’t get what he wants.

I’m playing devils advocate and presenting the other side of the argument. I’ve also substantiated every point I’ve made. I’m not being arbitrary for the sake of it.

That broadening the discussion can be percieved as bias says more about those calling bias than anything else.

Blerk, if that’s the case I take it all back.

I was highlighting a further example of your logical inconsistency rather than trying to be petty. Frankly, I was taking my own cues from you claiming that my “rhetoric is saying the Sony are not entitled to the right of doing what is in their best (business) interests if it happen to conflict with your current whim” so you might want to reconsider crying foul about me quoting you out of context when you’re perfectly happy to put words into my own mouth.

But if I was going for irony I’d probably start with you claiming that my position of saying that both sides have the right to be selfish meant I begrudged Sony looking after their interests, and follow it up with “That broadening the discussion can be perceived as bias says more about those calling bias than anything else.”

Sorry Spiral, you lost me at “I was highlighting..” If you had a point in either of those paragraphs you appear to have disguised it very well indeed. Congratulations!

Sony wanted to, and were selling the Playstation brand as, an evolving platform. PS2 could play (most) PS1 games, PS3 *used to* play (most) PS2 games.

The mass market likes the idea of an evolving format.

By the logic displayed here, it’d make perfect sense for a manufacturer of Blu-Ray players to remove DVD playback if it could save them a quid or so on each player because, after all, they’re trying to get people to buy their Blu-Ray products, not the previous-generation DVDs.

OH WAIT, THAT WOULD BE MONUMENTALLY STUPID

Retroid wins.

I’d agree.

OH WAIT. MEDIA FORMATS ARE NOT THE SAME THING AS INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE NOR REMOTELY AS COMPLEX.

Oh well. The comparison seems appropriate until you think about it for more than 3 seconds. I think we need to make some games/movie comparisons to round things off nicely. We could throw some apples and oranges in too!

Would you not agree that BC has always been part of the PlayStation DNA though Shatner? Even Sony themselves bulletpointed it as a key differentiator.

I called Retroid. I’m sticking with it!

OK morriss. Don’t let wildly inappropriate comparisons bother you. So long as they sound pretty, who cares if they’re relevant? Right?

Psychotext, I’m not even going to honour “PlayStation DNA” as a term. Considering the grief exec get from gamers for using things like “core gamer” or “supply constrained” I think it’s a bit silly to start creating new terms for the fun of it.

But, out of 4 PlayStation branded products (PSP + 3 consoles) only one has had backwards compatibility. One and a half if you want to argue the first few PS3s. Objectively, I wouldn’t take the exception and argue it’s the standard just so I can suggest the standard is being changed.

Shatner: PlayStation DNA is from a press conference… I didn’t create it. The very same press conference where they talked up how good their BC was compared to that of the 360.

(Yes, I have a memory like a heffalump for this sort of thing)

It’s called Sony DNA here but I’ve heard both used:

“Kaz Hirai – Sony Computer Entertainment, America:

It’s always been an important strategy of Sony Computer Entertainment that we provide value to the consumers; and one of the values that we’re providing is the backwards compatibility of the PlayStation 3, to play PlayStation 2 games that the gamers and consumers have bought over the years, as well as the original PlayStation titles that have been available in the market since 1995.

And I think that when we ask the consumers, or the gamers to make an investment in software, that it’s our responsibility to make sure that the future consoles that we bring to market, including a PlayStation 3, is able to actually play all these titles that the consumers have really spent a lot of money in, and invested a lot of money into really a master library.

And I think you’re doing the consumers and the gamers a huge disservice, when you come out with a new console only to say, it only plays PlayStation 3 games; and that’s really counter-intuitive to our strategy, but also, really to the Sony DNA who’re always trying to provide compelling consumer value in any of the products that we launch.”