Console Backwards Compatibility

[ctophil]

This forum is a hardcore gamer place. So, you guys play classic game consoles by default. But my question is this...do you care about console backwards compatibility at all? I sure don't. But my ear is always on the ground listening to people talk about how they hate the current generation of systems (PS4 and Xbox One) don't have backwards compatibility at all. The Wii U, however, can play SOME Wii games. But Gamecube games are not compatible.

Sony launched (although still in its infancy) their game streaming service (Netflix-style with games) call Playstation Now, which allows people to play older PS1, PS2, & PS3 games on their PS4. But Microsoft is pretty quiet about their future plans. They did mention that software emulation is in the works where you can download games from Xbox Live from the previous generation. That is not even something they really care about.

As for myself, I could care less about backwards compatibility. The concept has been around since the Atari days where the Atari 7800 could play 2600 games. I always feel that each console should play their own games. That is why I have 2 TVs (with one spare) for classic consoles and 2 HD TVs for new-gen consoles. There is something else. I have a "strange" tradition of taking care of my consoles where I let the console rest every 2-3 hours of gameplay (and not play it for the rest of the day) and rotate them around so that each console has a rest period (like a few months). So, I believe that if you play say a PS1 on PS2, the PS2 would not have time to rest when you feel like playing another PS2 game next time. Get my point?

It seems "strange" to regular gamers. But you know, my oldest console (The NES) bought back from 1988 still works like new. The up and down mechanism (where you put the game in) still works flawlessly where other people complain that the older NES models wear out quickly and the mechanism has to be replaced all the time. All of my other consoles also work like new.

Anyways, Backwards Compatibility is a marketing thing for casual gamers in my opinion where they like to trade in their "old" consoles for the new ones. Therefore, they can no longer play older games if the desire to do so. Another thing is people complain about running out of room with so many consoles to manage. Really? If there is a will, there is a way. I've seen hardcore gamers' house where they have massive entertainment centers that cover the walls with classic consoles to modern ones. You can play anything you want--just pick up the controller. :-)

[Necromancer]

Depending on how it's done, I'm pro backwards compatibility.  It's not a deal breaker if it doesn't have it, but why not include the feature when the new system is using a hardware architecture similar to its predecessor (like gc/wii/wii-u)?  It's not so great when it's accomplished like it was on the launch PS3s, with extra parts and cost.

[xelement5x]

I like it if for no reason than needing to have less things hooked up.  The PS3 was great because it could also autoupscale PS2 games and make them look a bit better. 

[cjameslv]

Backwards compatibility is awesome. I think all systems released should go back one gen if the media format is the same. What Nintendo does for their handhelds is exactly how it should be done. Even with a format change they support going back one gen and the newer format (ds lite). So yes why not, it saves time changing out systems and the time you would of used setting up that system you can instead use to yell to your wife/kids to get you another beer and snacks.

[Necromancer]

What Nintendo does for their handhelds is exactly how it should be done.

I have to disagree.  The only reason it works for them is because they use cheap hardware that can be included without dramatically increasing costs even though they're doubling up on hardware (each new handheld includes the cpu of the previous generation).  I think the way it's done on the gc/wii/wii-u (and presumably the xbone and ps4) makes more sense, where the next gen system is built around a more powerful version of the existing architecture.

[Desh]

I like it if for no reason than needing to have less things hooked up.  The PS3 was great because it could also autoupscale PS2 games and make them look a bit better.

Just a fun fact.  Compare playing a PS1 game on an early PS3 and playing it on a Dreamcast using BLEEM.  It's amazing how much better it looks on a Dreamcast than on Sony's own hardware.

As far as backwards compatibility goes, I think it's good to have.  There are a few XBOX games I would have never played since I owned a PS2 in that gen.  Because the 360 is backwards compatible it allowed me to discover some older gen titles I had never played.  Same with PS2.  I am not going to hook up a PS1 when I have a PS2 that plays both.  I have countless hours on my PS2 that was a launch model and have never had a single problem with it.

[cjameslv]

What Nintendo does for their handhelds is exactly how it should be done.

I have to disagree.  The only reason it works for them is because they use cheap hardware that can be included without dramatically increasing costs even though they're doubling up on hardware (each new handheld includes the cpu of the previous generation).  I think the way it's done on the gc/wii/wii-u (and presumably the xbone and ps4) makes more sense, where the next gen system is built around a more powerful version of the existing architecture.

Well they did that with pc's cpu/memory and video cards for awhile but at some point you will hit a wall. Whether it be the pipelines, heat etc. They wouldn't be able to use the same architecture once it's reached it's limits. So a new system would have to be implemented and produced to keep up with the ever evolving graphics. On a side note i don't believe ps4 plays anything but ps4 discs(exception being the lame store to d/l shit).

[Necromancer]

Architecture was perhaps the wrong term.  I didn't mean an updated version of the cpu or gpu design but rather the instructions they're capable of running (i.e. - today's i7 can run the same x86 code as the original 8086).

[toymachine78]

This forum is a hardcore gamer place. So, you guys play classic game consoles by default. But my question is this...do you care about console backwards compatibility at all? I sure don't. But my ear is always on the ground listening to people talk about how they hate the current generation of systems (PS4 and Xbox One) don't have backwards compatibility at all. The Wii U, however, can play SOME Wii games. But Gamecube games are not compatible.

Sony launched (although still in its infancy) their game streaming service (Netflix-style with games) call Playstation Now, which allows people to play older PS1, PS2, & PS3 games on their PS4. But Microsoft is pretty quiet about their future plans. They did mention that software emulation is in the works where you can download games from Xbox Live from the previous generation. That is not even something they really care about.

As for myself, I could care less about backwards compatibility. The concept has been around since the Atari days where the Atari 7800 could play 2600 games. I always feel that each console should play their own games. That is why I have 2 TVs (with one spare) for classic consoles and 2 HD TVs for new-gen consoles. There is something else. I have a "strange" tradition of taking care of my consoles where I let the console rest every 2-3 hours of gameplay (and not play it for the rest of the day) and rotate them around so that each console has a rest period (like a few months). So, I believe that if you play say a PS1 on PS2, the PS2 would not have time to rest when you feel like playing another PS2 game next time. Get my point?

It seems "strange" to regular gamers. But you know, my oldest console (The NES) bought back from 1988 still works like new. The up and down mechanism (where you put the game in) still works flawlessly where other people complain that the older NES models wear out quickly and the mechanism has to be replaced all the time. All of my other consoles also work like new.

Anyways, Backwards Compatibility is a marketing thing for casual gamers in my opinion where they like to trade in their "old" consoles for the new ones. Therefore, they can no longer play older games if the desire to do so. Another thing is people complain about running out of room with so many consoles to manage. Really? If there is a will, there is a way. I've seen hardcore gamers' house where they have massive entertainment centers that cover the walls with classic consoles to modern ones. You can play anything you want--just pick up the controller. :-)

Ctophil.... Like the facewash? Hailing wants to know... That's what he masturbates with after reading Nullity's stories.

[cjameslv]

Architecture was perhaps the wrong term.  I didn't mean an updated version of the cpu or gpu design but rather the instructions they're capable of running (i.e. - today's i7 can run the same x86 code as the original 8086).

Ahh got ya. Yeah anyway they do it is good with me as long as it has the feature of being able to support older games.

[SamIAm]

How freaking sweet would it be if the PC-FX were backwards compatible with the PCE? Imagine if the loading times were twice as fast! And you've got built in S-video, too!

It blows my mind that the PC-FX has the graphics chips and the sound hardware from the PCE, but it's not backwards compatible.

But yeah, when backwards compatibility works 100%, like the PS2 for the PS1, it's great. PS3 for PS1, on the other hand, I can't get behind. Where's the 240p?

[slinkyturd]

I like backwards compatibility simply because it gives us as gamers more options. Whenever a company that creates consoles does this I think they are really out to accommodate as many people as possible. And we have to consider the alternative. Remember all the shitty features Microsoft had to ditch before launching their newest console because clearly they were trying to bend over as many people as possible?

For or against it or apathetic, It's a good sign a company makes their stuff backwards compatible.

[xelement5x]

How freaking sweet would it be if the PC-FX were backwards compatible with the PCE? Imagine if the loading times were twice as fast! And you've got built in S-video, too!

It blows my mind that the PC-FX has the graphics chips and the sound hardware from the PCE, but it's not backwards compatible.

But yeah, when backwards compatibility works 100%, like the PS2 for the PS1, it's great. PS3 for PS1, on the other hand, I can't get behind. Where's the 240p?

Lol, it's funny that when I was first learning about PCE hardware I thought the PC-FX was actually backwards compatible with all the other stuff and I was like, "why would you pay so much for a duo/r/rx when the pc-fx can play all that and more?"

Thankfully I figured out the truth before purchasing a PC-FX and being sorely disappointment. 

[TR0N]

I see backwards compatible as convenient for a console but not all ways a necessary thing,that's all.

[HailingTheThings]

This forum is a hardcore gamer place. So, you guys play classic game consoles by default. But my question is this...do you care about console backwards compatibility at all? I sure don't. But my ear is always on the ground listening to people talk about how they hate the current generation of systems (PS4 and Xbox One) don't have backwards compatibility at all. The Wii U, however, can play SOME Wii games. But Gamecube games are not compatible.

Sony launched (although still in its infancy) their game streaming service (Netflix-style with games) call Playstation Now, which allows people to play older PS1, PS2, & PS3 games on their PS4. But Microsoft is pretty quiet about their future plans. They did mention that software emulation is in the works where you can download games from Xbox Live from the previous generation. That is not even something they really care about.

As for myself, I could care less about backwards compatibility. The concept has been around since the Atari days where the Atari 7800 could play 2600 games. I always feel that each console should play their own games. That is why I have 2 TVs (with one spare) for classic consoles and 2 HD TVs for new-gen consoles. There is something else. I have a "strange" tradition of taking care of my consoles where I let the console rest every 2-3 hours of gameplay (and not play it for the rest of the day) and rotate them around so that each console has a rest period (like a few months). So, I believe that if you play say a PS1 on PS2, the PS2 would not have time to rest when you feel like playing another PS2 game next time. Get my point?

It seems "strange" to regular gamers. But you know, my oldest console (The NES) bought back from 1988 still works like new. The up and down mechanism (where you put the game in) still works flawlessly where other people complain that the older NES models wear out quickly and the mechanism has to be replaced all the time. All of my other consoles also work like new.

Anyways, Backwards Compatibility is a marketing thing for casual gamers in my opinion where they like to trade in their "old" consoles for the new ones. Therefore, they can no longer play older games if the desire to do so. Another thing is people complain about running out of room with so many consoles to manage. Really? If there is a will, there is a way. I've seen hardcore gamers' house where they have massive entertainment centers that cover the walls with classic consoles to modern ones. You can play anything you want--just pick up the controller. :-)

Ctophil.... Like the facewash? Hailing wants to know... That's what he masturbates with after reading Nullity's stories.

Drinking?