Should backwards compatibly be a must for next gen systems?

MegaDrive20XX said:
Really? Because the first system that comes to mind is the DS and DS Lite. Released at $150 originally I think, then dropped to $129 when the Lite arrived. So, when the DSi shows up at $169 and takes away the GBA BC, what did we just pay for?
Click to expand...

A camera, music player, apps, etc.
 
Zidart said:
GBA games look better on my DS and Gameboy color games look better on the GBAsp XD. So when it comes to portables, i will have to disagree with that.

though on a different note, the ps3's saving grace for me is that its AV cable is compatible with the ps2's so all i have to do is just unplug the AV and plug it in the ps2, and that probably takes as much energy away as swaping discs.

I highly doubt that adding BC would increase the price of the handelds... otherwise their actual worth would be like 20 bucks XD.... if it did add up to the price i'd imagine it was not an outrageous number like $100
Click to expand...

Maybe not for handhelds so much, but for consoles, definitely.
 
Fr0dus Maximus said:
A camera, music player, apps, etc.
Click to expand...

You mean stuff I got on my PS3 or PSP already? :D So we scarified 1 thing to be more like an iphone or ipod touch? Fantastic, but they always know where the money is going to.
 
Strubes said:
Maybe not for handhelds so much, but for consoles, definitely.
Click to expand...

Again.. I don't think so, I do not see any differences between playing GC games on my wii or my gamecube, hell my ps1 games play better on my ps2. (though i haven't tried ps1 games on a ps3 slim yet) maybe the 360 and the BC ps3 are the exception
 
Zidart said:
Again.. I don't think so, I do not see any differences between playing GC games on my wii or my gamecube, hell my ps1 games play better on my ps2. (though i haven't tried ps1 games on a ps3 slim yet) maybe the 360 and the BC ps3 are the exception
Click to expand...

They actually play better on the PS3 compared to the PS2 to be honest. 2 prime examples is CastleVania SOTN and Silent Hill had some odd graphical errors that were corrected thanks to the PS3's emulation.
 
Zidart said:
is that really true? the Wii is backwards compatible and i don't think that got added into its price, same for the DS and GBA.
Click to expand...

It depends on the architecture. The Wii is no different than a GC other than it has a bit more horsepower in the graphics department. Which is why it was easy to make it compatible.

Newer consoles like the 360 and PS3 have revamped and made more powerful chip architectures that makes older games less compatible. Hence, more expensive to program the system to play older games.
 
Yes. If I'm paying $400+ for a console that just launched, I want backwards compatibility with it. It just makes everything more convenient and is great if you never had the console before it. Plus, the Wii proves that it can be done without making the system an unreasonable price.
 
Homicidal Cherry53 said:
Yes. If I'm paying $400+ for a console that just launched, I want backwards compatibility with it. It just makes everything more convenient and is great if you never had the console before it. Plus, the Wii proves that it can be done without making the system an unreasonable price.
Click to expand...

Completely understandable and is the reason why I didn't buy a PS3 at launch. It's great that it originally had complete BC for the price, but since I personally don't require it, I waited until it got cheaper.

All the Wii proves is that it can be done if you don't plan on advancing your next console too much. Both the 360 and PS3 went with more power, which meant using different chip architectures, which means compatibility is going to suffer.
 
CreepinDeth said:
Completely understandable and is the reason why I didn't buy a PS3 at launch. It's great that it originally had complete BC for the price, but since I personally don't require it, I waited until it got cheaper.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I find no bc much more acceptable after the price of the consoles have dropped to about what they are now, but if I'm paying launch price for a 360 or PS3, I want backwards compatibility. Otherwise, I'll probably wait for the price to drop.

CreepinDeth said:
All the Wii proves is that it can be done if you don't plan on advancing your next console too much. Both the 360 and PS3 went with more power, which meant using different chip architectures, which means compatibility is going to suffer.
Click to expand...
And it was still doable on both. The PS3 initially had full backwards compatibility and the 360 should be almost completely backwards compatible, unless they stopped working on making Xbox titles playable on the 360 at some point and I missed it. Admittedly, Xbox games and PS1 games had some problems on the 360 and PS3 respectively, but it was more than good enough for me.
 
CreepinDeth said:
Completely understandable and is the reason why I didn't buy a PS3 at launch. It's great that it originally had complete BC for the price, but since I personally don't require it, I waited until it got cheaper.

All the Wii proves is that it can be done if you don't plan on advancing your next console too much. Both the 360 and PS3 went with more power, which meant using different chip architectures, which means compatibility is going to suffer.
Click to expand...

so if the next gen does not increase the power by much then BC is possible? if so then i am looking forward to next gen
 
Homicidal Cherry53 said:
And it was still doable on both. The PS3 initially had full backwards compatibility and the 360 should be almost completely backwards compatible, unless they stopped working on making Xbox titles playable on the 360 at some point and I missed it. Admittedly, Xbox games and PS1 games had some problems on the 360 and PS3 respectively, but it was more than good enough for me.
Click to expand...

PS3 had full BC because they included the Emotion Engine chip which is what the PS2 used. Once they pulled that, it had to be software emulation, but you have to pay programmers to make sure that games are compatible, which is what was going on with the 360. Once the 360 had a huge library of games, BC just wasn't a priority anymore.

Zidart said:
so if the next gen does not increase the power by much then BC is possible? if so then i am looking forward to next gen
Click to expand...

Yes and no. When you try to make a big leap in power, then usually BC suffers, because they'll most likely go with brand new architecture. It all depends if the console makers want to switch technology. They usually switch because it allows for the ceiling of development to be higher, which means that they have more room to work with than with technology that has already been pushed to it's limits.

It's kind of like how Apple switched to Intel chips. PowerPC chips were pretty powerful for their time, but the technology was stagnating and eventually Intel chips blew past them because they started using newer and better architectures. So Apple switched but you could no longer use certain software until developers made them compatible.
 
Well it seem's like Nintendo and Sony do know people enjoy playing older games, since the PS3 has PS1 Classic Games for sale and Nintendo has the Virtual Console thing, so what about this....Let's say you want to play Ocarina Of Time. now if there was no BC that would mean if you didn't own a N64 you would have to track one down, which means it might not be complete, then you would have to find the game, which unless you have good resources or just stupid amounts of extra cash, it starts to get pricey and well since the Wii fits this perfectly all you would have to do is buy LOZ collection and would most likely not spend as much money. So thats how I see it if I have the system thats fine but if I can't afford it or can't find it then yes BC is a plus, it's not a must, but it should be a option. (Ed note) I do realize that the collection may be hard to find but it was the best example I could think of.
 
Backwards compatibility has less to do with hardware architecture and overhead cost as it does with the amount of profit each company stands to gain by making you buy games again. Its a cash grab, cheaper to produce hardware without BC, and provides potential business opportunities through re-releases. Not including BC is lazy, profit-driven, inconvenient and costly for the end user

One console future, anyone? :D
 
stealth toilet said:
Backwards compatibility has less to do with hardware architecture and overhead cost as it does with the amount of profit each company stands to gain by making you buy games again. Its a cash grab, cheaper to produce hardware without BC, and provides potential business opportunities through re-releases. Not including BC is lazy, profit-driven, inconvenient and costly for the end user
Click to expand...

Although I agree that most companies do want to make more money, the reality is they don't make a whole lot of profit from re-releases unless it was already a huge game to begin with. I also don't see many re-releases on current consoles except for the Wii. Both PSN and XBLA have a ton of originals. I also fail to see how focusing on the future is being lazy. Architecture and overhead cost have a lot to do with it. Take the PS3, it already had full BC, why would they take it out? Because they needed to cut cost so that consumers would purchase it. And guess what? The PS3 has sold millions now compared to when it had full BC and profiting from their PS3 titles, not their PS2/PS1 titles.

I also agree that it can be inconvenient for a lot of people, but the whole point of even buying a new console is to get the latest games. That's the main point of it, and if a person can't afford it, then I'm sure the current console they own should be adequate. I didn't have a 360 for a while after launch and still had plenty of fun with my GameCube and PS2 until I was able to afford a new xbox.

One console future, anyone? :D
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm good for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top