How important to you is backwards compatibility in your console purchasing decisions? Is the ability to play PlayStation 3 games on a PlayStation 4 (or Orbis, or whatever) something that will make your purchase of any new console more likely?
Backwards compatibility has always seemed a bit of an odd feature for people to demand in a new console. Don’t we buy a new console because we want the new, exciting features and increase in power? Isn’t a large part of the reason we upgrade to get away from the restrictions of a previous generation? And even if you want to continue playing your library of games from the previous generation, won’t you still have that machine?
And yet, it’s an issue that appears in comments sections and on forums over and over again. It’s obviously something that many people are very passionate about.
It’s not exactly a staple of console hardware, either. The SNES didn’t play NES games at all. The N64 didn’t play SNES or NES games and the Gamecube failed to play N64, SNES or NES games. The Wii did have backward compatibility for the Gamecube and emulated a lot of older consoles through its Virtual Console system and the Wii U works similarly, although without any Gamecube titles just yet.
If you wanted backward compatibility on a Mega Drive (or Genesis), you needed an extra device known as the Master System Converter in Europe, Mega Adapter in Japan and Power Base Converter in the US. That was a pass-through device that converted the cartridge slot to accept Master System cartridges. The Master System Converter cost about £40, roughly the price of a new game, and wasn’t universally functional. The Saturn didn’t play Mega Drive games and the Dreamcast didn’t play Saturn games either.
The functionality was much more common in home computers. The new iterations of Spectrum computers ran programs made for older machines. The Amiga was compatible through each step of the system’s life. But it could be argued that the console business has always been slightly different, with larger generational leaps and more defined, lengthier periods with a single hardware focus.
So, backwards compatibility is a relatively new thing for consoles.
Only the PlayStation 2, Wii and Xbox 360 have reliably supported it in home consoles (Nintendo’s handhelds have a good track record for backwards compatibility, to be fair). Sony even removed the ability from the PS3 in the first hardware revision and sales certainly didn’t suffer for it. So why does it seem that many are expecting it in the next generation?
It’s not something that worries EA’s Chief Financial Officer, Blake Jorgensen. He recently said, during an investor call, “an important thing to remember is that next-gen consoles will most likely not be backwards compatible.” He went on to imply that this was a good thing for EA’s business as it would mean they could maintain sales of current generation software.
He also pointed out that incompatibility between generations would mean that groups of friends who enjoy playing online would all upgrade around the same time, assisting sales of next generation software when the time comes.
It’s easy for us older folk to forget that many modern console owners are too young to remember a change in generations that didn’t at least feature plenty of discussion around backwards compatibility. The PS2 had it, and dominated that generation. The Xbox 360 was almost entirely backwards compatible. The PS3 launched with it and there was a lot of backlash, at least online, when Sony removed it. So it’s reasonable that anyone under 20 years old would feel like it’s an assumed feature to at least seriously consider when they’re upgrading.
How imperative is it, though? If Sony unveils the PlayStation 4 and there’s no possibility of playing PlayStation 3 games on it, would you be put off from buying the new console? How far back do you want them to go with it, is one generation enough or would you demand PS2 and PS1 compatibility too? What are your plans for your existing generation of consoles, after you own the next generation?
Of course, some newer questions about backwards compatibility will arise with this generational shift. We now have large libraries of digitally distributed games, made for PS3 or Xbox 360 and sold via PSN and XBLA. We’ll most likely still be using some version of the PSN and XBLA on our next generation of consoles, so will those libraries fragment into games compatible only with this current generation and those compatible only with the next generation?
It would be, I believe, a major selling point if Sony or Microsoft can claim to have an existing library of hundreds of digitally available games when they launch their next consoles. Quite aside from the convenience of being able to re-download or even transfer my existing purchases to a new machine, I think the appeal to newcomers would be significant. But it’s certainly not a deal breaker for me.
Ultimately, when I buy the next generation of consoles, it will be because I want something new. I won’t pack away my PS3 or Xbox 360 until I’ve finished playing games on those consoles and when I do, it will be because there’s more excitement in the new than there is temptation in the old. But we’re all different, so let’s hear how you intend to bridge the generational leap with your own buying and playing habits.
Tom Pitcher
I’m concerned that the PSplus content will no longer be available once they decide to shut down the PS3 PSplus and start up the PS4 version of it.
Kennykazey
I want it, primarily for my PSN titles, but also because this is the first gen where I’m not jumping ship. I can see the cell processor being impossible to emulate, meaning it would have to be built in to work ( and I’d honestly pay a couple hundred pounds just for that) . But the 360 shouldn’t be as difficult as the biggest change from a PC setup hardware-wise is the special memory setup. The lack of BC isn’t enough to put me off at all though.
DeathByNumbers
I’d pay an extra £100 but not £200, no way. As much as I want it I don’t want it that much lmao
TSBonyman
No backwards compatibility – or more importantly – no further access to all my purchased content for which i also have no trade-in option, will mean i’ll be hanging onto my ps3 for some time and will be slower adopting the next gen this time around.
I still play some of my oldest psn games, was playing blast factor just last week – my first psn purchase – so i don’t really fancy losing any of my game library tbh.
JesseDeya
I agree, and I’ll be keeping at least one of my PS3s for years to come.
I find it funny all the people that want the next PS3 to be a) faster, b) better, c) backwards compatible, d) easier to develop for and e) cheaper.
Not all of those things are mutually inclusive, particularly C and E.
quinkill
I think if they didn’t include some sort of BC it would be a huge mistake. Think of Apple and potentially Steam as key competitors in the next console cycle. Both Apple and Steam offer backwards compatibility of sorts, when you upgrade your iPhone or PC you still have access to your library; and now newer games that run on your new hardware.
TSBonyman
Good point and seeing how consoles are now being steered towards free-to-play and In-App-Purchases like the mobile market runs on, it’s not too much to ask for the same treatment when it comes to our game libraries.
KeRaSh
The problem is that consoles usually don’t just use the new chip of the same architecture for the new generation and everything else requires complete emulation of the old hardware, which is pretty much impossible for the cell chip so the only way would be to include the cell chip in the PS4 (like they included the PS2 chip in early PS3s) but that would raise the launch prices of the PS4 considerably which then would piss off more people than it would please.
Ideally they could leave room for an expansion module that would include the cell chip which you could purchase independently at a reasonable price.
the_furious_man
This is what I was thinking. Sell a plug-in module for about £100 then if you don’t want it you’re not paying an even higher premium for PS4.
quinkill
Don’t get me wrong. I understand the limitations of cell processing with regards to BC. That’s kind of my point in so far as if they want to stay competitive against other companies who do offer BC, Sony have to consider it.
As a consumer the technicalities of how they implement this is not my problem. To the average consumer they will look at the steam box, the future gaming apple tv and the new PS4 and think well I have a library I can play on Steam and from the App Store why should I get a PS4 (especially at launch) if I can’t play my PS3 game library.
You’re absolutely right about the cell processor but the vast majority of consumers (those that can make or break a console) don’t give two farts about it. They just want to play games and their game libraries they’ve built up of last 6 years.
KeRaSh
The people that are too stupid to understand why it works on ARM chips but not between console generations are the ones that wouldn’t care in the first place.
I also don’t think Apple is going down the classic console path. If they decide to enter the market it would be an OUYA kind of thing.
The Steam Box will have it’s own set of problems with different hardware tears enabling different experiences. Imagine customers with a Steam Box realizing a few years after their purchase that their entry tier device is no longer able to play high end games.
I wouldn’t generalize the whole BC thing like that and the PS3 did just fine without PS2 compatibility. The people who are really asking for this kind of functionality are core gamers and as we all know, they are a small minority.
CR8ZYH0RSE
As some of the above i’m not fussed about backward compatible gaming.I would like to know if i have ps plus on this console will it run over to the ps4.Also this always on internet connection has me worried,i like to switch the electric off when i leave the house but with this you’ll have to have the console on standby which means it’s using electric plus internet power.How will that effect your house insurance if you had a fire knowing you purposely left it on?
DeathByNumbers
I’m not entirely sure but devices intended to be left in standby that are plugged in, in a safe manner, I don’t think you have much of an issue with as far as insurance goes. You shouldn’t have any problems anyway. By the way do you have a fridge/freezer? Do you turn it off when you leave the house?
CR8ZYH0RSE
Good point.but aren’t they everyday essentials,where as this would be non essential?
I’m probably wrong but would like to know how it effects everyone.
quinkill
I’m not sure you quite understand the meaning of “always online”. It means when always online when you’re gaming or your console is on. When you switch off your console it won’t be online unless you’ve set it to sync with server etc. Many PC games use “always online” but that’s only when you’re playing the game.
CR8ZYH0RSE
Cheers bud,you see i wouldn’t of known that if wasn’t pointed out to me.I just presumed that you always had to have the console on whether on standby or actually on.8)
flatspikes
I’m a bit torn on this. On the one hand I love having PS1 access on my Vita and I even revisit my 20+ digital PSP collection from time to time. However as this first year of Vita has progressed I’m accessing the PSP stuff less and less as content improves for Vita.
Will the same be true on PS4… Probably I suspect.
Peter Chapman
Some fascinating responses to this so far, it’s lovely to read what you all think :)
E8_BALL_
It would have been nice, but once my ps4 collection builds up, i’ll only use my ps3 to watch blu-ray movies, in a bid to prolong the ps4s working parts. As Cam the Man said, I tried an old gta once, but the leap from ps2-3 was huge, so backwards compatibility would still be welcome, if the leap isn’t as big this time around.
I’m more worried about how they handle pre-owned, as my brother & I, lend each other *alot of games. At worst, i’m hoping for a pass sytem, similar to online passes.
hol
Whilst it would be nice at first for BC, I’ll still have my PS3 for a while as a majority of my friends won’t be upgrading for a while, so I’m not hugely bothered, didn’t really use it on my old 60gb, after all, I didn’t pay that much money to play yesterday’s games. :)
The Lone Steven
I would prefer to be able to play PS3 games on the PS4 due to me not wanting to get rid of my collection in order to make room for the PS4 but it is not a deal breaker. I made a massive mistake with the switchover to PS3 as i foolishly got rid of my PS2 and PS2 collection but had i kept them, chances are, it would be covered in dust and begging me to kill it.
It would be a mistake to not include the ability to port your entire PSN collection over to the PS4 as i suspect many people will want to do that and if the PS4 is a PS3 on steroids, i can see no reason why they can’t do that. But having a collection of last gen games that you can play on the latest console can help to tide you over untill you can get a decent amount of games.