No Backward Compatibility? So What?

[GinraiPrime]

One major problem with no backwards compatibility, especially with this recent console generation, is that this new console is coming out as new games are still being released for the current xbox 360. Say a game comes out and it has an online mode, the new console comes out a month later and then Microsoft shut down the older servers for the 360. That makes the purchase of that brand new game for the older console nearly worthless. Sure some people don't care about online but its the fact that a portion of this brand new game you bought is now completely unavaliable to you.
Okay this can also apply to the PS4 since its not backwards compatible either but this is one thing that worries me about the PS4 too. I doubt either company would shut down the servers for the PS3 and xbox 360 so soon after the new consoles launch but who's to say they won't?
So you buy a new game now but only have so many months to play it online? Thats pretty damned unfair if you ask me. If you got a PC ya don't have to worry about that stuff at all. I'm only saying all this with so much focus nowadays on online play but its so annoying that servers can just be shut down on a whim, with little to no warning. With Sony wanting to support the gaming side of things more this time around, I doubt that the PSN access on the PS3 will be shutting down anytime soon after the launch of the PS4. With Microsoft and the Xbone however, well, let's just say I ain't gonna hold my breath that people who acess live on the 360 will still be able to afew months after launch.

But anyways, as much as I love backwards compatibility its not a huge deal breaker for me since I still have all my older systems but I can understand why its still desired by people and a huge plus for them. Why should the previous generation of games suddenly be closed of to you? You paid for them so you should still have the right to enjoy them. Not everyone can keep their older systems, either they trade it on for the new one or any other number of reasons why the can't have it around anymore. Sadly this just seems to be a major reason for them to sell you the games digitally all over again, sometimes for prices some games don't deserve.

 

[Xdeser2]

Okay, I see people getting pissed about the Xbox One (and the PS4) not being backward compatible. You can't even use the same controllers on the new consoles.

Why are we complaining about this? Consoles have never been backward compatible, have they? Not truly. I mean, I grew up playing on Nintendo consoles, and those were always radically different each generation. Hell, the cartridges were different shapes from one to the next. The discs were different sizes once they started using discs.

Do people really feel entitled to backward compatibility in the games they buy? Why?

--Morology!

As long as were using prior experiences as an argument...

I grew up in the PS2 and original Xbox generation. The PS2 HAD backwards compatibility with PSX titles. The 360 and PS3 HAD backwards compatibility with Original Xbox and PS 2 titles respectively. Its a feature we've come to expect in consoles, that early adoption doesn't mean our previous library of games are suddenly heaps of useless plastic. These next-gen consoles are claiming to be bigger and better than their predecessors, claiming that we don't need the others once they come out, trying to convince people to become early adopters. That falls flat on its face without backwards compatibility, hell, theres NO downside to it. It pushes up early adoption and helps (at least for a while) quell the drought of games that ALWAYS happens in the first 6-12 months of a console launch.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

Here it is in simple form:

Games sell consoles. Don't have a good enough library at launch? Backwards compatibility ensures you have both current AND previous libraries at your disposal, which increases the chances of your newer consoles selling. Sony COULD have capitalized on this, with the PS2 having one of, if not the most, powerful gaming libraries in the history of consoles; yet, they screwed themselves and their consumers by having different software architectures (I believe, not really sure on this) for their games.

Personal case in point: I own NO physical copies for my PS3. Yet, I have a shit ton of old school RPGs on it with which to play. Sadly, at the moment, I'm currently mowing several lawns with Salvador and his damn near infinite shooting rocket launchers in Borderlands 2, but when I tire of that, I'll be at the PS3 enjoying a good story and/or soundtrack.

 

[Genocidicles]

You do also realize that pretty much any game thats worth remembering 10 years from now will likely be available in digital format on whatever console you get then, usually at a bargain rate, with extra content right?

Yeah it sure is great having to pay for things I already own.

Also, who gets to judge if a game is 'worth remembering'? I sure as hell don't trust the likes of Microsoft or EA who think something is better just because it sold more.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Because I already have a good console..well good ish considering it IS a PS3 that will play all my PS2 games AND some of my PS1 games. I have quite the collection of games for my 360 as well. If I can't play those on a new console why the fuck would I bother with getting a new console? I have a PS3, a 360, and a Wii. As well as a gameboy advance and a DSI. For me, that takes care of EVERY GAME I WANT TO PLAY.(well almost. I'd like to update my DSI to a 3DS for Zelda but I can be patient in my waiting of doing that until I have the money to do so).

Here it is in simple form:

Games sell consoles. Don't have a good enough library at launch? Backwards compatibility ensures you have both current AND previous libraries at your disposal, which increases the chances of your newer consoles selling. Sony COULD have capitalized on this, with the PS2 having one of, if not the most, powerful gaming libraries in the history of consoles; yet, they screwed themselves and their consumers by having different software architectures (I believe, not really sure on this) for their games.

Personal case in point: I own NO physical copies for my PS3. Yet, I have a shit ton of old school RPGs on it with which to play. Sadly, at the moment, I'm currently mowing several lawns with Salvador and his damn near infinite shooting rocket launchers in Borderlands 2, but when I tire of that, I'll be at the PS3 enjoying a good story and/or soundtrack.

I think you MIGHT have meant PS3 in your first paragraph but then I could be misinterpreting that. However, I do, for the most part, agree. Sony started the PS3 with backwards compatibility. Then they decided to say to hell with that no more for the newer PS3's. I'm very glad for my backwards compatible first gen PS3(even if it has yellow lighted once already and I suspect it's getting ready to do so again) so I don't have to get rid of games I love (even if I do have most of them in their HD remakes). Personally, that was the stupidest decision Sony could have made. But then again, I'm not in the gaming industry outside of my video game obsession so what do I know right?

You do also realize that pretty much any game thats worth remembering 10 years from now will likely be available in digital format on whatever console you get then, usually at a bargain rate, with extra content right?

What if I don't want extra content in the game and want the game exactly as is right now? Some of us are happy without the extra content for some of our games....It's basically the same argument as having multiplayer trophies/achievements as part of your overall trophy/achievement score for the game for those of us who don't play multiplayer.

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

BC is especially important for anyone jumping ship to a different console or buying a console for the first time in a while. A lot of good games came out this gen and it would suck to miss out on them

Here it is in simple form:
Personal case in point: I own NO physical copies for my PS3. Yet, I have a shit ton of old school RPGs on it with which to play. Sadly, at the moment, I'm currently mowing several lawns with Salvador and his damn near infinite shooting rocket launchers in Borderlands 2, but when I tire of that, I'll be at the PS3 enjoying a good story and/or soundtrack.

Its funny you say that given your avatar. I bought Grandia on psn forever ago and still haven't gotten around to finishing it

 

[Something Amyss]

Consoles have never been backward compatible, have they? Not truly.

Yeah, that's why you can't put a PS disc in a PS2.

"What's that, imaginary voice in my ear? You could? You could even play them in Playstation 3s? Backwards compatibility with the PS2 until they went and removed it?"

Well...I stand corrected.

Sure, the Wii played Gamecube games, the Wii U plays Wii games, and most Nintendo handhelds have at least a generation of backwards compatibiity, but this has never been a thing, right?

 

[Something Amyss]

My xbox is from 05 and ringed once. still going like a champ, probably will forever because I take care of my things.

Obviously you don't take care of your things if you got an RROD.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

it was AN UPGRADE.

This is all that really needs to be said.
People have forgiven lack of backwards compatibility when the changes have made sense, when the formats have changed for the better.

People have been excited about the previous generation of consoles because they were backwards compatible. Meaning they EXPANDED your library, rather than reduce it. Yes, your previous consoles still exist, but then....what's the point of the new console if it has a bunch of titles I don't want and has no other features I'm interested in?

When you're selling product B, you try to show how it's better than product A that was sold before.

is it really that hard to understand that people want to play the games they loved sometime further down the line?

Some Playstation fans and many Xbox fans really don't understand, or at least that's the vibe I get from reading some of the comments. But you have to understand, this last gen (gen 7) was basically trained to feel this way. Xbox fans in particular are the fans of "disposable games". The new CoD is out? Better turn in the old one to Gamestop to get credit towards the new one! I have a lot of friends with 360s, and most have cycled the majority of their libraries back to Gamestop with zero fucks given, all to save a few $$. They just really didn't care about anything they played, the entirety of the gaming experience to them is just a flash-in-the-pan distraction. Then there is me on the otherhand, who is still playing Super Metroid at this very moment, which has been paused on&off on my wiiU game pad for 4 days.

I think that's probably the biggest and truest defining factor that separates "casuals" from "the hardcore crowd". Not whether or not their favor game is 'Angry Birds' or 'Halo', but rather how important their favorite games are to them. How much they care whether or not they are playable 5 years from now.

I don't think you should argue that (all or most of) the players are like that, but that the companies SEE players like that.

I don't buy games anymore unless I'm sure I can milk them for more than a year or two.

You do also realize that pretty much any game thats worth remembering 10 years from now will likely be available in digital format on whatever console you get then, usually at a bargain rate, with extra content right?

Yeah it sure is great having to pay for things I already own.

Also, who gets to judge if a game is 'worth remembering'? I sure as hell don't trust the likes of Microsoft or EA who think something is better just because it sold more.

Well then take care of your equipment and use the games in the consoles they are for, like I do, with my NES, my SNES, my XBOX (steel battalion ftw), and my PS1. Yea.

And he probably already does this. Because if anyone has a lick of sense, they treat their technology with respect.

The point is that if corporations see what people want, ignore it because they aren't "worth considering or investing in" I think that shows really bad PR. That's what Microsoft did.

Sony only looks better than Microsoft right now because they don't have any online restriction or used-game bullshit, and they didn't fucking say "it's ok if we annoy 5 percent of those gamers who wanted backwards compatibility."

The more time goes by, the more I'm seeing companies replace the "what does the customer want?" philosophy with the "what should we give customers now?" philosophy.

My xbox is from 05 and ringed once. still going like a champ, probably will forever because I take care of my things.

Obviously you don't take care of your things if you got an RROD.

I wouldn't surprise if he kept in a platinum case and it still broke. I got the RROD from breathing on my 360, twice.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

It dose not take much to do it and helps out real gamers so much. I guess that's why they do not do it they are to busy feeding pabulum and drool buckets to the casual core club.

 

[Eve Charm]

It softens the blow and helps more people buy your console knowing their old games or at least some of them will work. You do want people to buy your new console right ;p

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

BC is especially important for anyone jumping ship to a different console or buying a console for the first time in a while. A lot of good games came out this gen and it would suck to miss out on them

Here it is in simple form:
Personal case in point: I own NO physical copies for my PS3. Yet, I have a shit ton of old school RPGs on it with which to play. Sadly, at the moment, I'm currently mowing several lawns with Salvador and his damn near infinite shooting rocket launchers in Borderlands 2, but when I tire of that, I'll be at the PS3 enjoying a good story and/or soundtrack.

Its funny you say that given your avatar. I bought Grandia on psn forever ago and still haven't gotten around to finishing it

My uncle has the physical copy of the game and I have the digital. On both, I have logged over 100 hours of gameplay. Stories like that NEVER get old.

Neither does throwing Puffy at enemies.

 

[Xdeser2]

is it really that hard to understand that people want to play the games they loved sometime further down the line?

Some Playstation fans and many Xbox fans really don't understand, or at least that's the vibe I get from reading some of the comments. But you have to understand, this last gen (gen 7) was basically trained to feel this way. Xbox fans in particular are the fans of "disposable games". The new CoD is out? Better turn in the old one to Gamestop to get credit towards the new one! I have a lot of friends with 360s, and most have cycled the majority of their libraries back to Gamestop with zero fucks given, all to save a few $$. They just really didn't care about anything they played, the entirety of the gaming experience to them is just a flash-in-the-pan distraction. Then there is me on the otherhand, who is still playing Super Metroid at this very moment, which has been paused on&off on my wiiU game pad for 4 days.

I think that's probably the biggest and truest defining factor that separates "casuals" from "the hardcore crowd". Not whether or not their favor game is 'Angry Birds' or 'Halo', but rather how important their favorite games are to them. How much they care whether or not they are playable 5 years from now.

Bullshit

Im a long time 360 gamer and thats how I've NEVER felt about gaming.

dont use the CoD audience as a litmus test of everyone on the system -_-

 

[badgersprite]

The PS2 was backwards compatible with the PS1 and early PS3 models were backwards compatible too. The Nintendo DS was backwards compatible with the GBA, the GBA was backwards compatible with Gameboy Color and Gameboy games, and the 3DS still plays DS games. This is a huge selling point for me, particularly as a Pokemon player. I have Ruby and Sapphire plugged into my DS Lites right now, and most of what I play on the 3DS is actually DS games because there aren't many 3DS games.

Backwards compatibility is important to people because, I don't know about you, but I have a pretty damn huge library of games. PS2 games and Xbox 360 games especially, since I got the Xbox 360 before my PS3. My library isn't even anywhere near as big as a lot of gamers' collections. So, I ask you, what is really the advantage of me getting the Xbone if I'm still going to have to keep my Xbox 360 plugged in and ready to go if I want to play any of these old games I have and enjoy? Remember that new consoles are only going to have a small number of games out for them in the early days after their release, and I'm certainly not going to be interested in buying every single one of those games that they release in that period, or I won't be able to afford to buy more than maybe about two or three at a given time anyway.

In order for a console to be attractive to me, I need something to play on it while I wait for more games to come out or while I wait and save up enough money to be able to afford new games. I'd also point out that most games that come out during that transition period play perfectly fine on previous-generation consoles and are likely to be at least a little bit cheaper, so, if I can also get new games on my old console, there's really no incentive for me to switch over to the new generation, is there? So, really, without backwards compatibility, why should I switch over the second a new console comes out (which is when consoles can make the most money) when there is absolutely nothing I can play on the new console that I can't play on a current generation console and when I can't transfer any of my current games over?

That is why backwards compatibility is an issue they need to consider.

Now, either they can transfer digital downloads to the new consoles for free, which I sincerely hope that at least Sony does if they have any sense or otherwise I'm not going to have much of an incentive to get the PS4 any time soon, or they make the new consoles backwards compatible so that we actually have something to do with our new consoles before all the new games start coming out.

 

[Rattja]

I am getting a little fed up by people playing the "entiteled" card.

Here is how I see it.
Feel free to call it complaining or whatever, but think about it. If noone said what they wanted, how would they ever hope to get it?

So if people are complaining about things not having backward compatibility, it's most likely because they want it but are not getting it.
If you want to buy something that is not being made, what else are you supposed to do than speak up about it until those who can make it happen does so? Why they refuse to listen to their customers is beyond me, clearly people want this.

 

[ninjaRiv]

Why SHOULDN'T we expect it? It's a valid expectation of a machine that promises to do all the things it says it will. It's good marketing to say "hey, you know that huge library you have? Sure, you can go ahead and play it on this console. We encourage it because you're our loyal fans!!!"

Not only that, it's the BS line about people wanting it being backwards. Who talks about their customers like that? Plus, the BS statistic he gave? Only 5% of their customers play old games? No, a lot more than that play old games.

But to have a problem with people expecting BC seems silly. They should expect a machine like this to do something as simple and seemingly obvious as this. Don't say you can do all that and then say people are retarded for wanting the console to play games.

Although, I get why the poster doesn't get it, to some it's not an issue. People have space for their consoles. I kept my PS2 and I still play it a lot. But if PS3 had BC, I wouldn't need it. Not everyone has space. Not everyone has these consoles working.

But at the end of the day, like I said, it's a very simple expectation of a complex machine.

 

[Not Lord Atkin]

My view on this backwards compatibility thing is, that even though it might not be as important as some people believe it is, it's still something that players want. Therefore it should be worth it to include it for the sake of convenience and to accommodate the customers. Especially from the business point of view - it shouldn't matter to the console makers whether people actually use backwards compatibility, what should matter is whether they want it in the console they buy and whether they are going to take backwards compatibility into consideration when making a choice between the systems.

You see, I can still get the decision not to include it in case of Sony. They had to completely rebuild the system architecture, because, let's face it, that cell processor fiasco was a nightmare for developers. They had to make a call between catering to the people who are going to make games for the PS4 or including backwards compatibility. Given that the two options are mutually exclusive, I think they made a good choice.

As for microsoft though... there's just no excuse. The 360 architecture was already based on PCs and simple to develop for. They were not forced to change it in any way. And worst of all, they knew that PS4 was not going to be backwards compatible and that people cared about backwards compatibility. They had a massive opportunity to give themselves an edge against competition and they blew it. They even went on to insult the people who care about backwards compatibility, calling them backwards and whatnot.

I said this before and I'm probably going to say it again in the near future: Microsoft have their heads stuck so far up their asses they now think that sky is brown.

As for me, I do not really care about the feature that much. At least it gives me a reason to keep my old consoles.

 

[Charli]

People like to play their old games, without having to buy them again.

...Maybe you are not one of these people. But I am. When ever one of my old games becomes weathered by time and becomes unplayable I am quite sad.

Also its one of the things that has driven me to PC. The chances of the game being filtered out by hardware become very slim as even 20 years down the line, dedicated nerds will find ways to improve the compatibility to current day soft and hardware through tweaking and modifications or at the most desperate: 'A virtual OS/Emulator'.

Consoles on the other hand, while some (PS1-3 ish) and (Gamecube to Wii) have faithfully honored this way of keeping their customers, the recent generations have opted out of it, because it's a long term profit gain, alot to invest to keep the engine expansive enough to support all old and new. But they loose long time fans to competitors should their console be a flop.

Can't play my old 'good' classics on this arguably unattractive and expensive looking console with poor release titles? Oh well I guess I'll look elsewhere....


...See the issue?


My sisters boyfriend, who arguably is one of those typical 'buys every Call of Duty, Assassins Creed etc and just follows what's popular on the bro-ternity' type (He is still a nice person and I consider him a brother) even with his expansive 360 library has said there is NOTHING that appeals to him hardware wise on the XBone and if the PS4 comes out cheaper, he's getting that.

 

[xPixelatedx]

Bullshit

Im a long time 360 gamer and thats how I've NEVER felt about gaming.

dont use the CoD audience as a litmus test of everyone on the system -_-

I am to, but that doesn't change what most people apparently do with their games. There is a reason the 360 section of used games at gamestop is bigger then the PS3 and wii section combined. People just have an easier time separating from them. I am not like that and apparently you aren't either, but that doesn't take into account the actions of so many others.

 

[wickershadow]

Honestly? It comes down to cost. The want for used games is obviously there, but does that want warrant an extra $100-$150+ cost to make the console backwards compatible? For a great deal of people the answer is no, which is what we saw with the PS3 when it was first released at $600~. When Sony realized this they striped the compatibility out to put down the cost of the console down to a point where people would want to buy it. I'm certain that if people were willing to pay the cost, or that the cost was insubstantial they would include backwards compatibility but at the moment including it would price their console above their competitor and we'd likely see a repeat of the PS3 release.

TLR; Backwards compatibility makes the console more expensive than people want to pay.