Backwards compatibility is important, here's why...

[Monster_user]

I'm assuming the strongly anti-BC posters are either not collectors or are only on their first or second generation of consoles...

...BC should be considered important otherwise one day some games will sadly be lost.

Or they have a better insight into what it takes to develop backwards compatibility, or are already struggling with the cost of a luxury.

The more accurate the backwards compatibility, the more costly it is.

For various good reasons consoles rarely use chips compatible with previous generations. Even if they did, the software is completely different. As an individual who writes scripts, I can speak with experience on the difficulty in maintaining backwards, or cross-platform compatibility. As the demand drops off, you have to stop supporting previous platforms, and something will break eventually. Software is not "perfected" yet, so it changes dramatically over time. Heck, hardware isn't perfected yet.

The Generation immediately preceding the current one is the most problematic. The resources that are required are far to great to emulate on the current hardware. Hardware chips that are compatible are far too expensive to include at the console's target price, and still be able to buy new chips that provide next-gen level graphics. Then you've got different peripherals, different media, different controllers, different screen dimensions, etc. Stuff like "Rumble Packs", or "Memory Cards", or "Dial-Up connections", or portable version adapters, or glitches/exploits that became features.

Hardware as old as your Megadrive can be replicated using software, without loosing the speed of running the games on real hardware. To do this requires programmers, who require money. That money is not a lot for the programmers, but it is a lot for the developers @ $40k+ per developer, per year. Once the code is written, it is still not finished. Inevitably something will break, and repairs will have to be made. The code needs to be maintained. Your not buying a piece of hardware, you have to keep a team on staff to maintain compatibility software, which costs a lot of money. Finally, as recently demonstrated, licensing issues come into play. Companies usually do not want to place nice, and release their classics at affordable prices, or even allow music, player names, characters, or logos, etc. to be resold in any fashion.

The alternative is to let the fans do all of the work, if that wasn't illegal.

Developing a competent system for emulation previus hardware would be costly? Oh yeah.... everyone did.

Now we wait to see if the market will support it on the next generation of hardware, or if the cost was not worth it. It isn't a one-time investment, they are going to have to port, and patch the code for the next generation.

They are going to have to maintain the storefront, and hope they once again get enough licensed content so that it doesn't look like a waste.

 

[Mr C]

Backwards comparability isn't important

You want to play old games?

Get an old console.

Simple as that.

A PS3 has a requirement to be able to play PS3 games. If you expect it to play PS2 games, then you need to redo first grade because you cant seem to count.

The original one could though, and what about those that have the old console break down? They become harder to find over time, and it's not actually that hard for them to do backwards compatibility, I hope the next Xbox does it because I have tonnes of 360 games.

And to flick it off as not important is just stupid, some people have favorites from different generations, what's wrong with them wanting to be able to play them still.

It doesn't matter. The CD's break down as well.

And no there is nothing wrong with them wanting something. However the market didn't want it enough. That you want it isn't going to make them restart the production of playstations is it now? They are going to need a few million people who want it. And want it more than the next generation.

Now just a bit of correction here. It can be hard making backwards compatibility. To shrug it "Its not that hard" shows a complete and utter lack of understanding for the subject matter.

If you want to keep playing you older games, then keep your older generation platform. The next generation isn't made with the idea of play last generation games.

backwards compatability was the number 1 aspect gamers wanted in a console by a large margin, it was also the very same aspect that they KNEW would never make it in because those companies want to milk as much money as possible (not to mention kinda a pain in the rear)

What you have done here is take "Your opinion" and mistaken it for "The opinion of the market". It is not the number one aspect when they realized they had to pay more for the functionality. Who would have thought? Developing a competent system for emulation previus hardware would be costly? Oh yeah.... everyone did.

I know, but often it's not the same (I know I'm being a sentimental fool).

The other problem is that not all games get emulated and they aren't legal. Hopefully one day that will change.

EDIT: Hit wrong quote button, sorry. *shamefully crawls into hole*

 

[ResonanceSD]

Now, keeping up with PC gaming isn't quite as complicated, but one does have to build a gaming rig and upgrade it every once in a while,

Sorry, I had to stop you there...
But, um, it's not less complicated than simple to use consoles. It's WAY more complicated. You just kinda glossed over the complicated parts... Video cards, compatibility, Operating systems, firewalls, and anything else that is entailed in PC gaming is a series of headaches for those who just want to plug in and play, like consoles offer.

Sorry what? Aside from the GPU choice, which in itself isn't hard, there's literally thousands of helpful webpages and users like @Matthew94 and myself on this very website to help out with questions like that.

None of those other things you mentioned are remotely difficult. If you don't have a compatible OS for PC gaming, either you're stuck in 1995, or you're so far ahead of the curve that you don't find computers difficult.

If you don't have a firewall, then you haven't got a security program, which Windows itself comes with.

What else is entailed with PC Gaming that you find an impediment?

 

[Ryotknife]

Backwards comparability isn't important

You want to play old games?

Get an old console.

Simple as that.

A PS3 has a requirement to be able to play PS3 games. If you expect it to play PS2 games, then you need to redo first grade because you cant seem to count.

The original one could though, and what about those that have the old console break down? They become harder to find over time, and it's not actually that hard for them to do backwards compatibility, I hope the next Xbox does it because I have tonnes of 360 games.

And to flick it off as not important is just stupid, some people have favorites from different generations, what's wrong with them wanting to be able to play them still.

It doesn't matter. The CD's break down as well.

And no there is nothing wrong with them wanting something. However the market didn't want it enough. That you want it isn't going to make them restart the production of playstations is it now? They are going to need a few million people who want it. And want it more than the next generation.

Now just a bit of correction here. It can be hard making backwards compatibility. To shrug it "Its not that hard" shows a complete and utter lack of understanding for the subject matter.

If you want to keep playing you older games, then keep your older generation platform. The next generation isn't made with the idea of play last generation games.

backwards compatability was the number 1 aspect gamers wanted in a console by a large margin, it was also the very same aspect that they KNEW would never make it in because those companies want to milk as much money as possible (not to mention kinda a pain in the rear)

What you have done here is take "Your opinion" and mistaken it for "The opinion of the market". It is not the number one aspect when they realized they had to pay more for the functionality. Who would have thought? Developing a competent system for emulation previus hardware would be costly? Oh yeah.... everyone did.

actually, there were quite a few polls waay back in the day which is where i read it. It is not really a coincedence that most of the revered console systems are also backwards compatible (not to mention i can easily argue that you are guilty of the same thing).

I would actually pay more for backwards compatibility (so long as its reasonable), but that is niether here nor there. I do not like the idea that my PS2 titles have a finite date due to diminishing supplies of PS2 consoles. Hell, some PS2 titles are more expensive right now than they were when first retailed.

I know backwards compatibility will never happen, and i made peace with it somewhat for the PS2 era. BUT, I am concerned for the next few generations. every new generation of consoles last a shorter amount of time before breaking. My PS2, if maintained, can last for quite awhile (10-ish years). PS3? honestly i will consider myself lucky if it lasts for 5. that goes double for the 360. next generation will probably last 3-4 years if you are lucky. the one after that maybe 2-3 years and so on.

I view backwards compatibility like cruise control in cars. Not essential, but really nice to have.

honestly im more concerned about the rumored anti used games systems in the new generation of consoles. PC gaming is looking better and better.

There are a large amount of problems with that reasoning.

Does the entire market that would potentially buy a PS3 use the sites that had the poles or was it a site that mainly focuses on gaming increasing the likelyhood of only asking people who arn't first time buyers or enthusiast? In otherwords did the pole represent the meaning of the market or of a specific subset of the market?

Did those poles mention that this option would increase price?

You are an enthusiast. And you represent a certain subset of the market a lot smaller than you may think. What about all the parents who bought the PS3 for their kids who hasn't had a PS2? What about the "frat boy" gamer demographic who just got into gaming this generation as gaming moved from a medium for nerds and kids to adults? What about adults who got into gaming for the same reason?

I am sorry. Your poles do not represent the market.

does the entire market want on disc dlc?

does the entire market want multiplayer only games?

does the entire market want games series that change to broaden the potential audience (a la dead space 3)?

you cant poll the entire market , it is a faceless mob. about the only portion of the mob which can be analyzed ARE the "enthusiasts". We cant trust the game industry on what the entire market wants because they are clearly out of touch with their customers as the previous examples show with their terrible business decisions.

so....what? apparently nothing represents the market? either way i do not see why you are so passionate against the concept of adding in backwards compatibility that many people would enjoy and vehemently shoot down anyone that says they want it >_>

see now, im cynical so I dont believe BC would happen in the near future. I dont crush peoples desires, light them on fire, and then piss on the ashes though jeez.

...not to mention there is a good chance ill skip this console generation altogether (first time since atari)

 

[Monster_user]

Sorry what? Aside from the GPU choice, which in itself isn't hard, there's literally thousands of helpful webpages and users like @Matthew94 and myself on this very website to help out with questions like that.

None of those other things you mentioned are remotely difficult. If you don't have a compatible OS for PC gaming, either you're stuck in 1995, or you're so far ahead of the curve that you don't find computers difficult.

You don't have to be far ahead of the curve. Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 does not support 64-bit operating systems, which means that most of the users that bought a Windows 7 machine and had trouble with the game, probably ended up with a generic response from a minimum wage EA support tech "64-Bit Operating Systems are not supported."

Just like I did.

What else is entailed with PC Gaming that you find an impediment?

What is so much more difficult about hooking up an X-Box, than a DVD Player, or NES? Most people already have these skills, and if they don't then there is usually simple step by step instructions included with the purchase. Custom built rigs do not come with assembly instructions, as the steps may vary.

Most pre-assembled PCs do not come with "gaming" graphics cards, and do not warn users of this fact. Vendors have sometimes used proprietary sizes, or expansion slots, or just rare sizes and expansion slots to artificially increase the cost of upgrades. Vendors have even left out expansion slots like AGP, or PCI-Express x16 slots, to reduce the cost of the machine. Most people who have a computer, have one of these pre-assembled PCs.

When people first buy a computer they don't even know the difference between a CPU and a GPU. When they spend $50 on a brand new game, and find out that it is incompatible with their computer, and then they can't return the game, it is enough to put anybody off from PC gaming. Later they find out there are some "chinese" codes called "System Requirements" that could let them know what works on their PC, if they can figure out what they mean, and what they actually have. This says I need an NVidia GPU, I bought the fastest Intel something or other that the store had, four cores at 2.6ghz, is that not fast enough?

When they get to this last point, THEN they wonder if there is some place to ask these questions, while staring at a facebook page. They normally get a response that is laden with unfamiliar terms, which is unintentional obfuscation.

Compare "Do you have a PCI-Express x16 slot?" to "Do you have an X-Box 360?". "Do you have a Radeon, or a Geforce?" to "Do you have an X-Box 360?". "Do you have a Geforce 460 or better?" to "Do you have an X-Box 360?".

Finally, compare a mother shopping for a video game, or system upgrade for her child.

"Does your computer have a quad-core process, 2GB Geforce 460, 560, or 660 GPU, or 2GB Radeon HD 5600, 6600, or 7600 GPU, and 4GBs of RAM?

vs

"Does your son have an X-Box 360?"

While the user that you responded to likely is at a level of skill that he is capable of assembling his own PC, most people do not. I've been a PC repair technician since 1998, I worked behind a Walmart electronics counter. The average Joe public just has no frame of reference with which to approach the magic computer dohicky. It doesn't work like any other appliance they have, it doesn't make any sense.

 

[GAunderrated]

What I don't understand is why nothing is backwards compatible more than one generation. The WiiU will play Wii games, but not gamecube games, so I'll have to keep my Wii just to play gamecube games.

Stupid.

Agreed. As someone who doesn't like having 20 wires all over my room I'd like to not have 10 systems in my room plugged in to play my entire library when I could have 3-5.

 

[ResonanceSD]

None of those other things you mentioned are remotely difficult. If you don't have a compatible OS for PC gaming, either you're stuck in 1995, or you're so far ahead of the curve that you don't find computers difficult.

You don't have to be far ahead of the curve. Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 does not support 64-bit operating systems, which means that most of the users that bought a Windows 7 machine and had trouble with the game, probably ended up with a generic response from a minimum wage EA support tech "64-Bit Operating Systems are not supported."

Just like I did.

Did you ask anyone for advice before buying your prebuilt PC? Did you look online? I'm not saying that a PC is the easiest thing ever, but I'm saying that it's nowhere NEAR as hard as you're making it out to be.

Snip

I'm getting the vibe that you bought a prefab without doing research, please correct me if I'm wrong. Yes, prebuilt systems aren't usually gaming devices. No, they didn't tell you that when you bought it. However, when you're dropping cash on anything, do you ever check what you're spending money on from a source OTHER THAN THE PERSON SELLING IT TO YOU?

For example, when I recently bought my car, I had a look at some cars in my price range, from people who weren't the car salesman. When I bought my PC, I spent weeks researching it.

I'm not saying PCs are easy to use, or as cheap as consoles at first (they are in the long run, just btw)

I'm not saying you can just buy one, plug it in and play games (after a while however, you can buy a game, plug it in and go for your life)

What I am saying is that you do have to understand what you're buying, and to do that, you need to do some research.


Oh, and I'm sorry about this, have consoles finally stopped making you download updates before allowing you to "plug and play" the games you do buy?


One last thing

Later they find out there are some "chinese" codes called "System Requirements" that could let them know what works on their PC, if they can figure out what they mean, and what they actually have. This says I need an NVidia GPU, I bought the fastest Intel something or other that the store had, four cores at 2.6ghz, is that not fast enough?

Chinese codes?

 

[Monster_user]

Did you ask anyone for advice before buying your prebuilt PC? Did you look online? I'm not saying that a PC is the easiest thing ever, but I'm saying that it's nowhere NEAR as hard as you're making it out to be.

Maybe I'm just jaded from trying to make your argument to the many people standing in line to return their brand new PC, because they didn't tell me they wanted to play video games on it.

Imagine a customer asking for a fast computer for work. His son installs GTA IV on it, and it gets 4 FPS. The customer is angry at me for selling him a "slow" PC.

I'm getting the vibe that you bought a prefab without doing research, please correct me if I'm wrong.

I buy prefabs because they are cheaper, but I do my homework. A $300 Dell with a $50 GPU serves my gaming needs well enough until I can afford a proper gaming rig. I know how to tone the graphics down.

My customers on the other hand do buy prefabs without doing research.

Cars have common terms that are easy to understand, such as Horsepower, MPG, Dependable. What research do you need to do to buy a car? The first time you buy a car, you will likely have an older sibling, friend, or parent who can point out important things to research. Otherwise it is mostly personal preference.

One last thing

Chinese codes?

Chinese codes implying how foreign the terms are at first glance, and how clearly they communicate what they are, and how important they are to the uninitiated.

Minimum System Requirements

OS: Windows Vista - Service Pack 1 / XP - Service Pack 3
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8Ghz, AMD Athlon X2 64 2.4Ghz
Memory: 1.5GB, 16GB Free Hard Drive Space
Video Card: 256MB NVIDIA 7900 / 256MB ATI X1900

Recommended System Requirements

OS: Windows Vista - Service Pack 1 / XP - Service Pack 3
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4Ghz, AMD Phenom X3 2.1Ghz
Memory: 2 GB (Windows XP) 2.5 GB (Windows Vista)
18 GB Free Hard Drive Space
Video Card: 512MB NVIDIA 8600 / 512MB ATI 3870

OS = Two letters. "Operating System" = Cryptic words. Operating means it does something, or controls something, System means it is a system, a bunch of parts that work together. The keyboard and mouse maybe? I do know what a Steering wheel is, and tires are commonly referred to in culture so I figured that one out easily.

Processor = Something VERY important I've heard. It says Intel, Intel is a big brand, so I always by Intel. I understand horsepower, because I know what a horse is, and horses pull things.

Memory = Memory? What's that? Is that where you store all the programs? When I look for a car, I like to find one that handles well on curves.

Hard Drive = Its hard. What does "drive" mean? Is the "Hard Drive" the case/tower? I like SUVs rather than motorcycles, because they have more storage space.

Video Card = Its for video. Does that mean its only for movies? When I look for a car, I like european styling.

MB? GB? Megabytes? Gigabytes? Still no idea what these mean. Mega means big right, so it has big Bytes? Kilometers Per Gallon makes perfect sense though, thanks.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Maybe I'm just jaded from trying to make your argument to the many people standing in line to return their brand new PC, because they didn't tell me they wanted to play video games on it.

Imagine a customer asking for a fast computer for work. His son installs GTA IV on it, and it gets 4 FPS. The customer is angry at me for selling him a "slow" PC.

So ask your customer what they want the PC for, then be honest with them? It's been a long time since I've worked in retail, maybe I'm just too old for this, Murtaugh.

 

[FalloutJack]

You don't need to tell me how important backwards compatibility is. I already know. There's a vastly-expanding libary of games going classic as time marches on, a universe growing infinitely to last or even outlast civilization (ours, not the game) until aliens discover our bleached bones surrounded by an RROD'd X-Box Pi-Times-Infinity, a WiiUBUVOODOO-Plus, and a PS238.

 

[RESURRECTION21]

Keep both systems. Like the original 2 gens of Pokemon, but not their reboots? Still have that Gameboy or Gameboy Advance? Want to play an Xbox game that doesn't work on the 360-read: any original Xbox Star Wars game-well do you still have the original Xbox?
/thread

um not to be a dick but both kotors and the ep 2and3 games play on 360

 

[RedDeadFred]

Normally I would say backwards compatibility is key for me but it won't apply with the next generation (at least not until I can afford both new consoles). I currently own a 360 and I can just continue to play the games I like on it. However, my system of choice for the next gen will definitely be a PS4. I don't like the direction Microsoft is taking their console and I don't like how they have steadily gone down in exclusive content.

 

[Supernova1138]

You don't have to be far ahead of the curve. Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 does not support 64-bit operating systems, which means that most of the users that bought a Windows 7 machine and had trouble with the game, probably ended up with a generic response from a minimum wage EA support tech "64-Bit Operating Systems are not supported."

Just like I did.

Umm, NFS Hot Pursuit 2010 is perfectly compatible with 64 bit Operating Systems, I run the game just fine on my Windows 7 64 bit. Now if you have XP 64 bit, that might be why it doesn't work, as software support for 64 bit XP is limited, software developers chose to largely neglect it. If you were having problems with the game, it probably had more to do with a driver issue, or you had some program running in the background that wasn't playing nice with the game. If this was at release, it would seem that any issues it had with 64 bit operating systems were resolved with a patch.

 

[shrekfan246]

You don't have to be far ahead of the curve. Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 does not support 64-bit operating systems, which means that most of the users that bought a Windows 7 machine and had trouble with the game, probably ended up with a generic response from a minimum wage EA support tech "64-Bit Operating Systems are not supported."

Just like I did.

Wait what? Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (2010) played perfectly fine on my Windows 7 64-Bit laptop. Never had any crashes and actually had pretty tight keyboard controls for a racing game too.

OT: If publishers didn't condemn emulation as being "illegal" while letting their titles go out of print and become impossible to find new/in stores, then I'd agree a little more. Yeah, more and more older titles get added to the Virtual Console and PSN all the time, but those aren't going to last forever either. Honestly, I wish emulation would get treated like abandonware does. If you find a copy of Star Ocean, chances are nobody who created or distributed the game is going to see any money for it.

Captcha: "wisdom of inglip" Our Dark Lord has returned.

 

[Monster_user]

You don't have to be far ahead of the curve. Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2010 does not support 64-bit operating systems, which means that most of the users that bought a Windows 7 machine and had trouble with the game, probably ended up with a generic response from a minimum wage EA support tech "64-Bit Operating Systems are not supported."

Just like I did.

Umm, NFS Hot Pursuit 2010 is perfectly compatible with 64 bit Operating Systems, I run the game just fine on my Windows 7 64 bit. Now if you have XP 64 bit, that might be why it doesn't work, as software support for 64 bit XP is limited, software developers chose to largely neglect it. If you were having problems with the game, it probably had more to do with a driver issue, or you had some program running in the background that wasn't playing nice with the game. If this was at release, it would seem that any issues it had with 64 bit operating systems were resolved with a patch.

I have Vista x64.

The problem I am still having does not appear to be a 64-bit issue. The game appears to "buffer" or "load" during the middle of a race.
While it is pulling data from my HDD, frame rates drop to 8 FPS. This happens at the exact same spot everytime no matter what I have running in the background. My PC exceeds the minimum requirements for this game, so this should not be happening.

That is when I got the 64-bit OS not supported nonsense from EA's tech support.

 

[GAunderrated]

Backwards comparability isn't important

You want to play old games?

Get an old console.

Simple as that.

A PS3 has a requirement to be able to play PS3 games. If you expect it to play PS2 games, then you need to redo first grade because you cant seem to count.

The original one could though, and what about those that have the old console break down? They become harder to find over time, and it's not actually that hard for them to do backwards compatibility, I hope the next Xbox does it because I have tonnes of 360 games.

And to flick it off as not important is just stupid, some people have favorites from different generations, what's wrong with them wanting to be able to play them still.

It doesn't matter. The CD's break down as well.

And no there is nothing wrong with them wanting something. However the market didn't want it enough. That you want it isn't going to make them restart the production of playstations is it now? They are going to need a few million people who want it. And want it more than the next generation.

Now just a bit of correction here. It can be hard making backwards compatibility. To shrug it "Its not that hard" shows a complete and utter lack of understanding for the subject matter.

If you want to keep playing you older games, then keep your older generation platform. The next generation isn't made with the idea of play last generation games.

backwards compatability was the number 1 aspect gamers wanted in a console by a large margin, it was also the very same aspect that they KNEW would never make it in because those companies want to milk as much money as possible (not to mention kinda a pain in the rear)

What you have done here is take "Your opinion" and mistaken it for "The opinion of the market". It is not the number one aspect when they realized they had to pay more for the functionality. Who would have thought? Developing a competent system for emulation previus hardware would be costly? Oh yeah.... everyone did.

actually, there were quite a few polls waay back in the day which is where i read it. It is not really a coincedence that most of the revered console systems are also backwards compatible (not to mention i can easily argue that you are guilty of the same thing).

I would actually pay more for backwards compatibility (so long as its reasonable), but that is niether here nor there. I do not like the idea that my PS2 titles have a finite date due to diminishing supplies of PS2 consoles. Hell, some PS2 titles are more expensive right now than they were when first retailed.

I know backwards compatibility will never happen, and i made peace with it somewhat for the PS2 era. BUT, I am concerned for the next few generations. every new generation of consoles last a shorter amount of time before breaking. My PS2, if maintained, can last for quite awhile (10-ish years). PS3? honestly i will consider myself lucky if it lasts for 5. that goes double for the 360. next generation will probably last 3-4 years if you are lucky. the one after that maybe 2-3 years and so on.

I view backwards compatibility like cruise control in cars. Not essential, but really nice to have.

honestly im more concerned about the rumored anti used games systems in the new generation of consoles. PC gaming is looking better and better.

There are a large amount of problems with that reasoning.

Does the entire market that would potentially buy a PS3 use the sites that had the poles or was it a site that mainly focuses on gaming increasing the likelyhood of only asking people who arn't first time buyers or enthusiast? In otherwords did the pole represent the meaning of the market or of a specific subset of the market?

Did those poles mention that this option would increase price?

You are an enthusiast. And you represent a certain subset of the market a lot smaller than you may think. What about all the parents who bought the PS3 for their kids who hasn't had a PS2? What about the "frat boy" gamer demographic who just got into gaming this generation as gaming moved from a medium for nerds and kids to adults? What about adults who got into gaming for the same reason?

I am sorry. Your poles do not represent the market.

does the entire market want on disc dlc?

does the entire market want multiplayer only games?

does the entire market want games series that change to broaden the potential audience (a la dead space 3)?

you cant poll the entire market , it is a faceless mob. about the only portion of the mob which can be analyzed ARE the "enthusiasts". We cant trust the game industry on what the entire market wants because they are clearly out of touch with their customers as the previous examples show with their terrible business decisions.

so....what? apparently nothing represents the market? either way i do not see why you are so passionate against the concept of adding in backwards compatibility that many people would enjoy and vehemently shoot down anyone that says they want it >_>

see now, im cynical so I dont believe BC would happen in the near future. I dont crush peoples desires, light them on fire, and then piss on the ashes though jeez.

...not to mention there is a good chance ill skip this console generation altogether (first time since atari)

I am not passionate against BC or those who want it.

I am Passionate against those who have who have the misunderstanding that they represent enough of the market to pay for it. Unlike your previous examples. They do get sold for more than it cost to make them. Justifying their existence. Unlike BC.

I am a reality check. Stuff costs money, and BC may be an issue. But not an issue that the world cares enough about to pay for. In other words. Not important.

Few years ago I worked at Best Buy in the gaming section and whenever someone was talking to me the first 2 questions are:

1. Which one is best (ps3,xbox, wii)
2. Can it play ps2/ps1 games (for ps3 only of course)

I would say I talked to about a few thousand people and the majority in my experience seemed upset about not being able to play their old games. More times than not people walked away from buying a Ps3 because it couldn't play their older games until they found what games they wanted to play.

I know this is only a sample size but if the sales of the ps3 is a reflection of my own experience with customers, I would say it reflects accurately the ps3's last place sales this entire cycle.

I personally have the last 80 GB ps3 that can play ps2/ps1 games before they took that feature out and I am glad I bit the 500 dollar MGS4 bundle.

 

[Loonyyy]

Thing is, backwards compatability is more effort and time, and requires making sure that all future versions of the consoles understand and can interpret the previous ones, with all the bugs and glitches that could arise.

And at what point do we abandon games? There's a point where they're so old that to build in backwards compatability is a pointless hassle. You end up with a major case of diminishing returns. And, since you still presumably have your old console, I would suggest, I don't know, PLAYING THEM ON THAT?

I've still got a N64 which I boot up occassionally to play some Banjo Kazooie or Mario 64. When the consoles are released, resale on old ones drops to nothing, so there's no reason to get rid of them. Seriously, a little thought by gamers rather than expecting the manufacturer to go to considerable trouble against their best interests to do something which does not earn them money? It's a no brainer. Big corporations aren't interested in helping you, they're interested in making money. Backwards compatability for all titles would be a hindrance to that. So use some sense and avoid relying on them.

The reason most companies include limited backwards compatability (See Game Boy Advance, xBox 360), is that it gives a greater number of titles at launch. That feature doesn't necessarily cover all the releases, and some are left behind. Making the thing backwards compatable for everything is a problem which grows with every game released. Imagine trying to make every Playstation game ever released (1,2 & 3) wok on the Playstation 4, whenever that's released. The massive amounts of QA get you what, a couple of fans not ranting at you? That small amount of goodwill doesn't translate into a lot of extra dosh when they're playing old games and not buying new ones.

Look at the PC: If we want to run games from DOS, oh look, we'll have to emulate. Emulation is a far better solution than true backwards compatability. If there were legal sales of the ISOs or whatever, that could be far more interesting, and actually profitable to manufacturers, than screwing with the compatability of the entire catalogue of their last decade.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you'd read the beginning of the post clearly, you'd have noticed that I didn't write the hyperbolic contrived scenario; I was quoting someone else,

That would get you off the hook were you not echoing those sentiments by making a thread using it as an example of why we need BC.

and yes, I just admitted that it is hyperbolic and contrived.

A shame you are championing it.

Even so, it got me thinking about why I think backwards compatibility is important. That is all.

That's not all. You specifically said:

My thought: this is why we need backwards compatibility.

If you meant something different, great. By golly, if this got you thinking, wonderful. But that wasn't the thrust of your original post. Using your actual stated words (which is all I have to go on), you were establishing this guy's reasons as your own. THIS is why we need BC.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

If you'd read the beginning of the post clearly, you'd have noticed that I didn't write the hyperbolic contrived scenario; I was quoting someone else,

That would get you off the hook were you not echoing those sentiments by making a thread using it as an example of why we need BC.

and yes, I just admitted that it is hyperbolic and contrived.

A shame you are championing it.

Even so, it got me thinking about why I think backwards compatibility is important. That is all.

That's not all. You specifically said:

My thought: this is why we need backwards compatibility.

If you meant something different, great. By golly, if this got you thinking, wonderful. But that wasn't the thrust of your original post. Using your actual stated words (which is all I have to go on), you were establishing this guy's reasons as your own. THIS is why we need BC.

Ah, so me saying "Me thinking" and "I think backwards compatibility is important" is so far apart from me saying "My thought" and "we need backwards compatibility" that you just had to correct me on how to express my own opinion? Thanks.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Yah i didn't get the part where you said PC gaming isn't as complicated as console gaming. It's objectively the other way around. When you consider that almost everyone has a TV, it can be eliminated from the equation.

Of course I'm making a subjective statement.

My work here is done.

I'm guessing you're one of those "He didn't preface his opinion with 'in my opinion,' so he's trying to pass off his opinion as fact!" types.

You didn't have to be a jerk to me. What the hell did I do to you?

"You think it's subjectively more complicated. It's not a factual argument,"

As if this nullifies my statement? Do I really have to specifically explicate that something is my opinion without it being undermined with statements of "that's not factual"?