PSN to SEN: Time to rage quit? - DarkFeed
19 hours 22 mins ago
An interesting look at Backwards Compatibility on the major platforms for gaming. Is Backward Compatibility needed now or a thing of the past ? The writer seems to think it is, yet also shows the facts around why MS and Sony are stepping away from it. Take a look and see what you think.
Ask yourself these questions.
Do you still play games from last gen ? Do they look, sound, and play too dated, or do you consider some of them classics you want to play again and again ? Are some of them fun trips down memory lane whenever you get jaded with this generations offerings ? Or, with so many games now on current generation consoles, are you over the past and chasing the future?
Is there a future for backwards compatibility,
and if so what will it be ?
Backwards compatibility, or the ability to play games from previous gen consoles on your new gen console, has been around since disc-based gaming. The PS2 allowed you to play PS1 games, though you needed a PS1 memory card.
Additional sources:
- Original Xbox Games Playable on Xbox 360 (xboxoz360gamer.com)








Comments
Way back when, games were simpler (usually), often colourful, and addictive. Most games also didn't require 20+ hours to complete, so if you felt like playing it again, it wouldn't take forever to complete The graphics didn't 'age' in quite the same way 3D ones do. They were already lower resolution and basic to begin with, so yeah....
But I'd hate to see BC disappear. Even though I pretty much don't play any older game anymore (on the PS2), it is always nice to have the option, and lots of people do pop an old game into their system just for kicks.
I think we might find many gamers are simply spoilt for choice these days. Whereas many years ago, our choices were few and far between, we spent 20 plus hours inmost games, and did so over and over again.
These days, many younger gen gamers give a game a few hours, beat it (so called beat it that is) and then trade it in for the next big thing or simply trade it in to say they have X number of games or have played X number of games for bragging rights.
Not exactly good gaming in my book. BC is great, but so is the price of say a 1st-gen Xbox. We can pick one up here in Australia wfor the cost of ONE normal game ($85)and thus have access to every game that came out on the 1st-gen console.
I have mine resting under my 360, and can run both at the same time, switch between console while both are playing a game, for comparison reasons etc, and enjoy the fun of both consoles. All for the cost of one normal priced game.
Or is that too hard or complicated for many gamers now, do they expect instant service on all things and demand the best at all times.
However, the point I would like to make is that technology will, invariably, break down at some point in the future. And while it can be repaired, the cost will increase and the availability of repair technicians will decrease. I think it would behoove the big three to make backward compatibility a necessary feature in order to preserve their history. Think about how many games have fallen by the wayside because of the incessant march forward of technology. Would we still have Super Mario Bros. without the Gameboy or VC? Would Sonic have survived without the Gamecube or VC? Granted, the Sonic Collections were multi-system, but they came from a virtually (lol) dead console series.
My point is, you don't stop playing a game just because its old (hell, look at Zork and StarCraft), you stop playing it because the hardware fails or the next-big-thing comes out. Every other major industry has a historical aspect that is preserved as a way to show how we came this way. Gaming (both PC and console) has a need to preserve its heritage, even if we have to include the likes of the Sega 32x and Nintendo Virtual Boy.
Now that I've been on the soapbox, I think BC is absolutely awesome. That's why I have the 80 gb PS3 in my living room. It was really fun to fire up Final Fantasy X and plow through it again. And having all my saves on the hard drive and not on a memory card is freaking amazing as I always hated to delete saves. Now, I just put them in a folder and back it up. I really don't think its a lot to ask to include backward compatibility as a) it increases the available game library; b) makes people go back and play those older games that are often better than the crap being put out today (I'm looking squarely at Sonic the Hedgehog for PS3); and c) why shouldn't the next generation pay homage to its predecessor's by playing their titles? It's not laziness, its preservation; besides, we pay almost $60 US for new titles here in the States (and I know a lot more in other countries), so why shouldn't you demand the best you can get from companies that charge you so much?
I don't mind about this. I have the best version and never complained about it.
This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.