Backwards Compatibility - Is it really that important?

the customer would like backward compatibility, the company doesn't.

It's weird though. I see friends buy all kinds of inane old games on steam on a lark. some times they're on sale, some times they read about it and want to try and old game. It makes me wonder if in the long run, companies have shit away a lot of money by not having universal (as possible) old games available. I always just run my old emulator for SNES, GENS, NES games. but i would have paid bank for those same games in the years till i discovered the EMU, and hell even today I ran all over game stop looking for an old PS2 game or two. one i couldn't find, one they wanted way more than i wanted to pay. I'd be happy to pay 20-30 bucks for old games i loved (if they worked on a system i had. like the PC).

Sega could have made dollars off of me selling me phantasy star IV, shining force I, II, and a hand full of other sega games. vs the zero dollars they made off of me from them not being sold.

My opinions are suspect though. I'm not a good example of a console goer...I haven't bought a console since PSI. I did play some more recent console games on my (then) girlfriend's wii. I do have a big pile of emulators and steam-released old games though.

I still go back and play old PC games occasionally. Hell, I used to boot up XCOM again every 2-3 years although that might finally be over with. I wish I could do the same with some console games, although tbh I'm less worried about it with the PS3 to PS4 transition than I was with the PS2 to PS3 transition. By the time I actually get a PS4 I should be through the PS3 games I care about anyway. There were still lots of PS2 games I cared about when the PS3 hit, and I was sad that I missed the chance to get a backwards compatible version.

More persistent games seem especially important though - FF14 and Dust514 come to mind for games that should do their best to transition to the new console.

I think backwards compatibility is honestly a bigger issue for handhelds. I have a psp, never bought a go, and when the Vita came out I very much considered getting one. Except, it obviously doesn't play the psp cartridges, and any games that I bought for the psp (including even some digital ones) would not transfer over.

It's nice to have on the bigger consoles, but because of their cycles it's not as big of a deal. I've rebought many nintendo games when they redo them, but being able to play gamecube games on the wii was always nice, especially with exclusive games that they had never made more of.

The PSP/DS were big ones; the DS being able to play GBA and then 3DS being able to play DS were fucking huge imo. There are just so many iconic games for those, and the handhelds upgrade more often than the consoles do, so some continuity should be required.

I never bought a Vita because I poured a ton of cash into my psp and bought a lot of good games - but the Vita was still on the same cycle as far as I was concerned, and having all the same titles available (relatively) on the Vita but having to rebuy them was fucking bollocks.

So short answer: It's not necessary, it's nice, but I think the handhelds make it a bit more notable for how often they upgrade. 3DS XL is 200 and the Vita is 270-300 depending on which version you get I believe, so that is not a small chunk of change to drop. Granted, I think the pspgo and the Vita were relatively poor decisions for Sony to begin with so meh.

I voted yes, but that's largely because of handhelds, and also because of specific games that everyone should get a chance to play being lost on some old console that is no longer supported by retailers or the parent company.

I voted No.

My PS3 has it but I never use it anymore. I did for awhile because I was a huge fan of God of War 1 and 2.. The metal gear series and the Silent Hill series which I had for the PS2. So it was great to still be able to play those on the PS3, then they go and release the HD versions and now I never use the backwards compatiblilty.

So.. it's nice to have but I don't think it's really needed anymore.

It's not a purchasing decision for me in the sense that I won't choose a system based on whether or not it has it, but it is a strong feature set for any system which you already own a library of games for especially at this point in my life where I don't get to finish games shortly after their release.

Is it handy for the first 6-12 months? Sure.
Is it important? No.

Again, I feel worse for developers than consumers. Imagine you still have an XBLA or PSN game coming out and half your audience isn't going to turn on the system again in 6 months.

Wombat_sl said:

Again, I feel worse for developers than consumers. Imagine you still have an XBLA or PSN game coming out and half your audience isn't going to turn on the system again in 6 months.

Click to expand...

I think you are overstating rate of adoption on new generation systems.

joz123_sl said:

No. The few games on PS2 I really cared about playing have been released on PSN or are getting HD remakes which is even better.

Click to expand...

This is where my hang up is. The games I really liked on PS2 are also on the PSN, but I already paid for them once. It rubs me wrong buying a game on PSN when I can see that same game still sitting on my shelf. Now I am okay with this if I am buying a license. After I get a game on the PSN if it is BC then I don't mind taking my game library digital.

What is really going to piss me the fuck off though is if the PS3 games I bought on the PSN don't work on the PS4. If I have to buy the same shit again for the PS4 then they can go fuck themselves. I haven't bothered to research any of this I am just assuming they won't be cunts about it.

Too busy to go back and play old games so dont care. It's a nice feature to have since you more than likely had the last gen version of the system and it would allow you to not need both hooked up at same time incase you had anything unfinished you were playing or friends/fam came over to play something old. However games will always be the deciding factor on a system for me.

LadyVex_sl said:

I think backwards compatibility is honestly a bigger issue for handhelds. I have a psp, never bought a go, and when the Vita came out I very much considered getting one. Except, it obviously doesn't play the psp cartridges, and any games that I bought for the psp (including even some digital ones) would not transfer over.

Click to expand...

Good point. I think this is becoming even more of an issue with the rise of iOS and Android. Over the past few years, my mom has gone through several iterations of the iPhone, yet she still has and plays many of the same games she had on her very first one. You could argue that this is more akin to DS>DS Lite>DSi>DSi XL, but I think it's going to get harder and harder to convince people that once they switch to a new generation of handheld (PSP>Vita), they're not going to be able to play their old games.

I can't help but wonder if the PSVita would've had a stronger release had they allowed some way of transferring UMDs to digital so you could still play them. The change from UMDs to cartridges hurt them in that regard. Nintendo, at least, was smart enough to not make a similar mistake with the 3DS.

meStevo_sl said:

They've already said PSN purchases wont transfer due to architecture/incompatibility reasons, that's as much of a play to prevent all the content they're giving away on PSN+ moving over too IMO. They are going to do their best to prevent an early-PS3 type environment where people buy the console but few if any games.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/02/21/s...ansfer-to-ps4/

Click to expand...

Just another reason I am so happy that I decided to try Gamefly. Fuck these people. I'll just wait for it to come in the mail and then send it back. I just grabbed a bunch of classic RPGs a few weeks ago on the PSN. They won't be seeing me do that shit ever again.

It's high on my wish list. It wouldn't stop me from buying consoles, but I would rather not have under my TV a PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4, +...+, PS9000

The Ancient_sl said:

I think you are overstating rate of adoption on new generation systems.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying half the 360 audience will migrate to the 720 this Christmas.

I do think the people most likely to buy XBLA/PSN titles are heavily weighted towards being early adopters.

Half is an exaggeration. It probably isn't that much of one though.

Lost Ranger_sl said:

Just another reason I am so happy that I decided to try Gamefly. Fuck these people. I'll just wait for it to come in the mail and then send it back. I just grabbed a bunch of classic RPGs a few weeks ago on the PSN. They won't be seeing me do that shit ever again.

Click to expand...

They specifically said in the article that current gen PSN titles wouldn't transfer due to having to emulate the cell architecture. I don't think there is a technical reason why they wouldn't allow classic games to transfer, so hopefully they will

Not a big deal to me this time around. Next generation switch may be different with the amount of digital stuff.