The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Backwards compatible consoles, are they a good thing or bad?
At first when I thought about this I thought that only the PS2 was backwards compatible but then on the train from Uni one of my friends took out his GBA and began playing a gameboy game on it.
It was an issue that came up in a lecture today in terms of backwards compatibility of processors and that got me thinking, originally on the PS2 but then onto all consoles.
When I thought about it more, there have been a few consoles I have thought of that with the help of extra hardware additions are able to play games from a previous console. The SNES had an addition to play NES games, the mega drive could play master system games. I think there are a few more but my memory is a little blurred (some of the ones I mentioned could be wrong too :) )
A backwards compatible console is one which plays games of a previous version console from the same developer, so the PS2 can play PSX games etc.
So what are the good points?
Well seeing as the PS2 is the only backwards compatible next generation console I will use it as an example. Microsoft have just entered the market so they have no other console to be compatible with and the GameCube from Nintendo used optical disks where all the previous Nintendo consoles have used cartridges so to make it backwards compatible would cost a lot.
There are a number of good points with a console being backwards compatible, if you owned the previous console then all the games and a lot of the peripherals can be used on your new console.
Some games only come out on the older console, for example Syphon filter 3, so having a console which plays both can be a bonus for games like this. It is the same with some peripherals, you in a way get the best of both worlds. It saves you having to own both consoles so you can sell the older one (if you own one) or only buy the newer one (if you don't already own either and like the games available for both) this expands on the number of games and peripherals you can buy, meaning there is a greater variety to choose from.
But as well as this, like with every argument there is another side to it all. So what bad points are there?
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console. Also most people I know sell their old console to pay towards the new one so in most cases they don't have and probably will never buy the old games as the newer games are more technically advanced.
I can't help thinking though that the hardware and software techniques that are used in a console to allow the feature of backwards compatibility could be used for something more beneficial to improving the games. Now I don't know the exact facts or details about what makes a console backwards compatible but I am sure that the console could be made a bit better if these options weren't required. The architecture could be changed so it no longer needs to cope with the option of the old PSX games and concentrate only on the PS2 games. Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
I also know a few people who have had problems in that not all games are compatible on the newer system, it may only be a few but it kind of defeats the purpose.
Also when a new console appears the older console usually drops in price quite a lot so most if they wanted could probably buy both if they want to be able to play old games on an older console.
The way I see it is that a new console should bring something new, better and offer a better experience, the PS2 does this with an added bonus of being backwards compatible but this is something I have used very little, I haven't played a single PSX game on my PS2 (I still have a PSX though) but I do use my old controllers. But If Sony could have made the PS2 better by sacrificing the option of being backwards compatible then I would have prefered Sony to make it better and forget about making it backwards compatible. I guess again it all comes down to money, if the developer thinks one option will maximise sales then it is likely they will include such an option.
At some point I would like to try get into the Gaming industry in some way, I would like to maybe work on games design or designing Gaming engines but If I don't get into them I would like to be involved in designing a console. Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they have sold as many PS2's? There are probably a lot of options they had to consider and to them the best idea was to make it backwards compatible. The PS2 could also be backwards compatible was the fact that its CD/DVD drive could easily be addapted to read various types of disks including the old games, had they chose a new storage meduim it is likely the PS2 wouldn't be backwards compatible.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible. So what do you all think? Is making a console backwards compatible a good thing or something that wouldn't really be missed?
At first when I thought about this I thought that only the PS2 was backwards compatible but then on the train from Uni one of my friends took out his GBA and began playing a gameboy game on it.
It was an issue that came up in a lecture today in terms of backwards compatibility of processors and that got me thinking, originally on the PS2 but then onto all consoles.
When I thought about it more, there have been a few consoles I have thought of that with the help of extra hardware additions are able to play games from a previous console. The SNES had an addition to play NES games, the mega drive could play master system games. I think there are a few more but my memory is a little blurred (some of the ones I mentioned could be wrong too :) )
A backwards compatible console is one which plays games of a previous version console from the same developer, so the PS2 can play PSX games etc.
So what are the good points?
Well seeing as the PS2 is the only backwards compatible next generation console I will use it as an example. Microsoft have just entered the market so they have no other console to be compatible with and the GameCube from Nintendo used optical disks where all the previous Nintendo consoles have used cartridges so to make it backwards compatible would cost a lot.
There are a number of good points with a console being backwards compatible, if you owned the previous console then all the games and a lot of the peripherals can be used on your new console.
Some games only come out on the older console, for example Syphon filter 3, so having a console which plays both can be a bonus for games like this. It is the same with some peripherals, you in a way get the best of both worlds. It saves you having to own both consoles so you can sell the older one (if you own one) or only buy the newer one (if you don't already own either and like the games available for both) this expands on the number of games and peripherals you can buy, meaning there is a greater variety to choose from.
But as well as this, like with every argument there is another side to it all. So what bad points are there?
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console. Also most people I know sell their old console to pay towards the new one so in most cases they don't have and probably will never buy the old games as the newer games are more technically advanced.
I can't help thinking though that the hardware and software techniques that are used in a console to allow the feature of backwards compatibility could be used for something more beneficial to improving the games. Now I don't know the exact facts or details about what makes a console backwards compatible but I am sure that the console could be made a bit better if these options weren't required. The architecture could be changed so it no longer needs to cope with the option of the old PSX games and concentrate only on the PS2 games. Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
I also know a few people who have had problems in that not all games are compatible on the newer system, it may only be a few but it kind of defeats the purpose.
Also when a new console appears the older console usually drops in price quite a lot so most if they wanted could probably buy both if they want to be able to play old games on an older console.
The way I see it is that a new console should bring something new, better and offer a better experience, the PS2 does this with an added bonus of being backwards compatible but this is something I have used very little, I haven't played a single PSX game on my PS2 (I still have a PSX though) but I do use my old controllers. But If Sony could have made the PS2 better by sacrificing the option of being backwards compatible then I would have prefered Sony to make it better and forget about making it backwards compatible. I guess again it all comes down to money, if the developer thinks one option will maximise sales then it is likely they will include such an option.
At some point I would like to try get into the Gaming industry in some way, I would like to maybe work on games design or designing Gaming engines but If I don't get into them I would like to be involved in designing a console. Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they have sold as many PS2's? There are probably a lot of options they had to consider and to them the best idea was to make it backwards compatible. The PS2 could also be backwards compatible was the fact that its CD/DVD drive could easily be addapted to read various types of disks including the old games, had they chose a new storage meduim it is likely the PS2 wouldn't be backwards compatible.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible. So what do you all think? Is making a console backwards compatible a good thing or something that wouldn't really be missed?
Nice post AliBoy!
I would say that I think backwards compatibility is a good thing because some people will not be allowed to get many new games for a new console for some reason and they would like to play games from old consoles on it then backwards compatibilty is needed.
But some more well off people wouldn't need all their old games because they would be able to get a whole pile of new ones and therefor, if a console is going to be made to cost more (which it usually isn't) be this then they should be thinking that there is no need for backwards compatibility.
Overall, I like it because it lets me bring back the past, even if I did sell my PSX but keep some games.
Good post though! :D
I would say that I think backwards compatibility is a good thing because some people will not be allowed to get many new games for a new console for some reason and they would like to play games from old consoles on it then backwards compatibilty is needed.
But some more well off people wouldn't need all their old games because they would be able to get a whole pile of new ones and therefor, if a console is going to be made to cost more (which it usually isn't) be this then they should be thinking that there is no need for backwards compatibility.
Overall, I like it because it lets me bring back the past, even if I did sell my PSX but keep some games.
Good post though! :D
I think it is obvious there will be a PS3, sony have built up a large fan base and produce a lot of great games. Also the main processor to be used in it is currently being developed and should be produced by 2004 at the earliest.
Resevilfan wrote:
I think Sony have learned their lesson
> and am expecting the PS3 to be a stand alone games system that only plays PS3
> games.
good post :-)
If there is a PS3
I think Sony have learned their lesson
> and am expecting the PS3 to be a stand alone games system that only plays PS3
> games.
good post :-)
If there is a PS3
AliBoy wrote:
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at
> all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console.
Since you've never played a PS1 game on a PS2 (you said somewhere) you've obviously don't know about Mip Mapping which will join all the pologons on a PS1 game giving it a super smooth look and another which is to boost loading speed by up to 12X, there are enhancements.
Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards
> compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I
> say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards
> compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
We had that discussion in the sony forum a little while ago, in the end we said you could easily make the console have 4 controller ports by thinking it has a multitap plugged in (they work with all games)
Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered
> when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't
> designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they
> have sold as many PS2's?
Probably not, having a console that plays PS1 games and DVD players make sales go through the roof but complicate the console.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards
> compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce
> another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible.
I think Sony have learned their lesson and am expecting the PS3 to be a stand alone games system that only plays PS3 games.
good post :-)
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at
> all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console.
Since you've never played a PS1 game on a PS2 (you said somewhere) you've obviously don't know about Mip Mapping which will join all the pologons on a PS1 game giving it a super smooth look and another which is to boost loading speed by up to 12X, there are enhancements.
Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards
> compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I
> say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards
> compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
We had that discussion in the sony forum a little while ago, in the end we said you could easily make the console have 4 controller ports by thinking it has a multitap plugged in (they work with all games)
Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered
> when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't
> designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they
> have sold as many PS2's?
Probably not, having a console that plays PS1 games and DVD players make sales go through the roof but complicate the console.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards
> compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce
> another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible.
I think Sony have learned their lesson and am expecting the PS3 to be a stand alone games system that only plays PS3 games.
good post :-)
Man - where do you get the time to think up these topics? I think your course is a cop out compared to mine! :-p
I obviously work much harder than you :D
Anyway - another good topic.
I never thought about the fact that maybe the PS2 was sacrificing some of its potential to allow for backward compatability. If so then i agree that maybe this is not such a good option.
Having said that - i have a a PSx at the moment and love most of the games on it. If I got a PS2 I wouldn't want to have to go and buy PS2 versions of the games i have (eg THPS3). They may look better but essentially they are the same game so I don't need another copy.
I think the main reason for being backward compatable is, as you said, when a particularly good game comes onto the old format but not on the new one (Syphon Filter). People without the original console may want the game but buying the old console JUST for the game is likely going to put them off.
Good topic. I think your catch phrase should be
'So what are the good points?' :D
GH
I obviously work much harder than you :D
Anyway - another good topic.
I never thought about the fact that maybe the PS2 was sacrificing some of its potential to allow for backward compatability. If so then i agree that maybe this is not such a good option.
Having said that - i have a a PSx at the moment and love most of the games on it. If I got a PS2 I wouldn't want to have to go and buy PS2 versions of the games i have (eg THPS3). They may look better but essentially they are the same game so I don't need another copy.
I think the main reason for being backward compatable is, as you said, when a particularly good game comes onto the old format but not on the new one (Syphon Filter). People without the original console may want the game but buying the old console JUST for the game is likely going to put them off.
Good topic. I think your catch phrase should be
'So what are the good points?' :D
GH
Backwards compatible consoles, are they a good thing or bad?
At first when I thought about this I thought that only the PS2 was backwards compatible but then on the train from Uni one of my friends took out his GBA and began playing a gameboy game on it.
It was an issue that came up in a lecture today in terms of backwards compatibility of processors and that got me thinking, originally on the PS2 but then onto all consoles.
When I thought about it more, there have been a few consoles I have thought of that with the help of extra hardware additions are able to play games from a previous console. The SNES had an addition to play NES games, the mega drive could play master system games. I think there are a few more but my memory is a little blurred (some of the ones I mentioned could be wrong too :) )
A backwards compatible console is one which plays games of a previous version console from the same developer, so the PS2 can play PSX games etc.
So what are the good points?
Well seeing as the PS2 is the only backwards compatible next generation console I will use it as an example. Microsoft have just entered the market so they have no other console to be compatible with and the GameCube from Nintendo used optical disks where all the previous Nintendo consoles have used cartridges so to make it backwards compatible would cost a lot.
There are a number of good points with a console being backwards compatible, if you owned the previous console then all the games and a lot of the peripherals can be used on your new console.
Some games only come out on the older console, for example Syphon filter 3, so having a console which plays both can be a bonus for games like this. It is the same with some peripherals, you in a way get the best of both worlds. It saves you having to own both consoles so you can sell the older one (if you own one) or only buy the newer one (if you don't already own either and like the games available for both) this expands on the number of games and peripherals you can buy, meaning there is a greater variety to choose from.
But as well as this, like with every argument there is another side to it all. So what bad points are there?
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console. Also most people I know sell their old console to pay towards the new one so in most cases they don't have and probably will never buy the old games as the newer games are more technically advanced.
I can't help thinking though that the hardware and software techniques that are used in a console to allow the feature of backwards compatibility could be used for something more beneficial to improving the games. Now I don't know the exact facts or details about what makes a console backwards compatible but I am sure that the console could be made a bit better if these options weren't required. The architecture could be changed so it no longer needs to cope with the option of the old PSX games and concentrate only on the PS2 games. Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
I also know a few people who have had problems in that not all games are compatible on the newer system, it may only be a few but it kind of defeats the purpose.
Also when a new console appears the older console usually drops in price quite a lot so most if they wanted could probably buy both if they want to be able to play old games on an older console.
The way I see it is that a new console should bring something new, better and offer a better experience, the PS2 does this with an added bonus of being backwards compatible but this is something I have used very little, I haven't played a single PSX game on my PS2 (I still have a PSX though) but I do use my old controllers. But If Sony could have made the PS2 better by sacrificing the option of being backwards compatible then I would have prefered Sony to make it better and forget about making it backwards compatible. I guess again it all comes down to money, if the developer thinks one option will maximise sales then it is likely they will include such an option.
At some point I would like to try get into the Gaming industry in some way, I would like to maybe work on games design or designing Gaming engines but If I don't get into them I would like to be involved in designing a console. Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they have sold as many PS2's? There are probably a lot of options they had to consider and to them the best idea was to make it backwards compatible. The PS2 could also be backwards compatible was the fact that its CD/DVD drive could easily be addapted to read various types of disks including the old games, had they chose a new storage meduim it is likely the PS2 wouldn't be backwards compatible.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible. So what do you all think? Is making a console backwards compatible a good thing or something that wouldn't really be missed?
At first when I thought about this I thought that only the PS2 was backwards compatible but then on the train from Uni one of my friends took out his GBA and began playing a gameboy game on it.
It was an issue that came up in a lecture today in terms of backwards compatibility of processors and that got me thinking, originally on the PS2 but then onto all consoles.
When I thought about it more, there have been a few consoles I have thought of that with the help of extra hardware additions are able to play games from a previous console. The SNES had an addition to play NES games, the mega drive could play master system games. I think there are a few more but my memory is a little blurred (some of the ones I mentioned could be wrong too :) )
A backwards compatible console is one which plays games of a previous version console from the same developer, so the PS2 can play PSX games etc.
So what are the good points?
Well seeing as the PS2 is the only backwards compatible next generation console I will use it as an example. Microsoft have just entered the market so they have no other console to be compatible with and the GameCube from Nintendo used optical disks where all the previous Nintendo consoles have used cartridges so to make it backwards compatible would cost a lot.
There are a number of good points with a console being backwards compatible, if you owned the previous console then all the games and a lot of the peripherals can be used on your new console.
Some games only come out on the older console, for example Syphon filter 3, so having a console which plays both can be a bonus for games like this. It is the same with some peripherals, you in a way get the best of both worlds. It saves you having to own both consoles so you can sell the older one (if you own one) or only buy the newer one (if you don't already own either and like the games available for both) this expands on the number of games and peripherals you can buy, meaning there is a greater variety to choose from.
But as well as this, like with every argument there is another side to it all. So what bad points are there?
Well for one the console dosn't improve the old games at all, they will play exactly the same way as they would on the older console. Also most people I know sell their old console to pay towards the new one so in most cases they don't have and probably will never buy the old games as the newer games are more technically advanced.
I can't help thinking though that the hardware and software techniques that are used in a console to allow the feature of backwards compatibility could be used for something more beneficial to improving the games. Now I don't know the exact facts or details about what makes a console backwards compatible but I am sure that the console could be made a bit better if these options weren't required. The architecture could be changed so it no longer needs to cope with the option of the old PSX games and concentrate only on the PS2 games. Take the PS2, if it wasn't backwards compatible then they could easily have had 4 controller ports built in (When I say easy I don't mean it to be used as really easy but a because it is backwards compatible it is almost impossible to build in 4 ports, or extremelly hard)
I also know a few people who have had problems in that not all games are compatible on the newer system, it may only be a few but it kind of defeats the purpose.
Also when a new console appears the older console usually drops in price quite a lot so most if they wanted could probably buy both if they want to be able to play old games on an older console.
The way I see it is that a new console should bring something new, better and offer a better experience, the PS2 does this with an added bonus of being backwards compatible but this is something I have used very little, I haven't played a single PSX game on my PS2 (I still have a PSX though) but I do use my old controllers. But If Sony could have made the PS2 better by sacrificing the option of being backwards compatible then I would have prefered Sony to make it better and forget about making it backwards compatible. I guess again it all comes down to money, if the developer thinks one option will maximise sales then it is likely they will include such an option.
At some point I would like to try get into the Gaming industry in some way, I would like to maybe work on games design or designing Gaming engines but If I don't get into them I would like to be involved in designing a console. Backwards compatibility seems like an option that has to be considered when it is in development, The PS2 maybe would have been different if it wasn't designed to allow us to play PSX games and use PSX peripherals but would they have sold as many PS2's? There are probably a lot of options they had to consider and to them the best idea was to make it backwards compatible. The PS2 could also be backwards compatible was the fact that its CD/DVD drive could easily be addapted to read various types of disks including the old games, had they chose a new storage meduim it is likely the PS2 wouldn't be backwards compatible.
I don't think the PS2 will be the last console to be backwards compatible with another console but I doubt that the PS3 (Assuming sony produce another console and call it the PS3 of course) will be backwards compatible. So what do you all think? Is making a console backwards compatible a good thing or something that wouldn't really be missed?