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.
endlesscupsoftea
For me, it’s not a deal breaker, nice but not necessary. I don’t really see the point of paying for a shiny new console, just to play older games! I have a ps3 to do that. I’ll just put by a bit of cash each month until I have enough for a ps4. Until then, I have a large backlog of games to get through!
coruscant
Although I love my ‘fat’ PS3 with BC, (going so far as too keep requesting ‘fat’ replacements when my PS3s brick, as they’ve done about 3 times now) I don’t see it as a priority for PS4, as I have no plans to sell my PS3. I’d rather they keep the cost down on the next console and be able to give it more power than have BC.
tantalus_blank
I think the amount of HD collections we’ve seen this gen is testament to the fact people do like to play older games. Backwards compatibility means you don’t have to keep another box under your TV with another 4 controllers and however many more accessories. Over the years I’ve occasionally cracked out old PS2 games and certainly put quite a few hours into PS1 titles, but it’s annoying having to source 4 working PS2 controllers for a round of Timesplitters (plus multitap) when I’ve got 4 perfectly good Dualshock 3’s sitting right there.
It’s not like I’ll be boycotting the PS4 – I was pretty annoyed about it this gen but I’m reluctantly resigned to it now.
phantom5813
In all honesty, i am not gonna bother with next-gen consoles for a long time. f they were to be backwards compatible from the go then I probably would have a change of mind but since they probably won’t then that’s a lost sale from me. I have more than enough ps3 games on my shelf to play not to mention ones I haven’t even bought yet. Add that to the fact Plus is constantly ramming games down our throats, and you have a situation where there is too much to play and not enough time.
My games shopping list has shrunk massively simply because of lack of time to play and im down to essential purchases only or i buy a gam when i finish 2.
I am sure next gen will be great with new visuals and fantastic games but, to be honest, I am not ready. I will wait a couple years till the hardware revisions are done, bug fixes and software updates are done (or a lot less) and the consoles have a decent library before i dip into another gen of gaming.
Foxhound_Solid
I don’t trade old consoles in so either way I’m good :-)
nukester
not bothered since sony banned me for nothing and spend like nearly 2 grand on their store, so i am looking forward to next gen to start again
Starman
Surprised nobodys mentioned trophy earning & online games. I often pick out a game I’ve not played for a while to try improve my trophy % or have a go online on killzone 3.
I’m also convinced that the graphical leap from this to next gen won’t be as big as the last was, so you’ll not be noticing the vintage graphics like we get now with ps2 & ps1 games.
And lastly, with the release drought that follows a new console release, it’d be a shame to not be able to pick up a few cheap old games to play instead.
freezebug2
Not fussed, I will still have all three consoles PS1 > PS3 so it doesn’t really concern me…… providing all of my digital purchases continue to work with the PS3 including ongoing support for PS3 servers, which there should be for years to come anyway!
keaneplay
In my personal opinion, backwards compatibility is important at the beginning of a new consoles life, as the number of popular games that will be available for the new console will be relatively low. However, once you’ve built up a collection of the new console’s generation of games it becomes, for most intents and purposes, obsolete as going back down a gen is difficult to adapt to.
When I first got a PS2, I had only one game to play (Robot Wars!) and that game was not enough to make me give up all my PS1 games. Had the PS2 not been backwards compatible I would have basically had a nice shiny new console sitting in the living room untouched, at least until I could afford more games – which would have taken a long time since I was only in school and had no income at all for games, except birthdays and Christmas.
When the time came around for me to buy a PS3, I knew that in order for me to make it worthwhile buying, I would have to delay the purchase until I could also afford at least 4 or 5 decent games to go with the console because there was no backwards compatibility by the time I was able to afford one.
The only fundamental reason I see for ensuring 100% backwards compatibility is that it protects us customers from losing access to our digital purchases, providing a much stronger possibility that we could redownload games such as Flower or Journey in years to come.
If a PS3 was to break down, in say 9 years time, it’s most likely that Sony would no longer be supporting PS3 access to the Playstation Network so getting hold of another PS3 would be useless as you couldn’t redownload all of your digital purchases any more, meaning that you’ve lost everything, unlike with the discs of the PS2, etc. Backwards compatibility removes (or at least lessens) this situation.
PS3RULEZ890
My first PS2 was TR The Angel of Darkness and that was a game my mum got me so I had a PS2 game to play, now I have loads including
FFX, FFX-2, FFXII, Shadows of Memories, Half Life, DMC 1, 2, 3, XIII, Soul Reaver 2 and loads more most of which are second hand purchases and I would like to play them on the PS4 if I got one.
Thats not including the amount of PS1, GameBoy/Color/Adance, PSP, DreamCast, NeoGeo Pocket Color and PS3 games that I have and if they needed online servers to work and those servers don’t exist anymore then I would be p!$$ed off at not being able to play them anymore and I would sue these companies for rendering my physical products useless for no reason at all, then we will see what happens to these companies that only what cash regardless of what the law says.
Sympozium
I don’t think the 8th gen consoles will play Ps3/x360 discs at all, it’ll probably be like the Vitas where PSP games are only playable has downloads.