No Backwards Compatibility - One of the many signs of industry greed?

[MorphingDragon]

Here is some internet. Help yourself.

Cannot be shipped to my country.

PS1s are a rarity, it wont be too long until the same is of PS2s and Xbox's

Becareful what you ask for.

Backwards compatibility is good.... if it works well. PS2's BC was awesome. As an above poster mentioned, it's because it could run PS1 games in the native code, and so it had very little translation to do.

The thing is... ps3s and xbox 360s don't use the same architecture. They're not using a ps2 as a sound chip or an xbox as a video toaster or whatever. That means emulation.

The truth of emulation is this: It takes a LONG time to get to the point where it's a passible substitute. Both the XBOX 360 and BC PS3s have long lists of games they simply won't work with. Why? Emulation requires a LOT of debugging. Tricks and shortcuts used with the original processor might not work with the emulation because, well, it's not using a processor.

It's a simple fact that it's expensive to perform, and it isn't necessarily a great value for the consumer. It's good if you want to introduce a system to new customers with the old software... but for old customers, they already have the new system, and many new customers don't care about old games.

It just doesn't sell enough systems to justify the expense.

I guess moral relativism comes into play here but, to my point of view, lying is immoral. They removed the hardware-based backward compatibility to cut costs, and replaced it with software-base (emulation). Then they removed that, citing as one of the reasons, that emulating for PS2 games was too taxing on the (remaining) hardware. Yet now, they sell emulated PS2 games on PSN. So apparently it's only taxing on the hardware when they're NOT trying to resell us the same games we've already bought.

Fact: Three of the four games did not work for either backwards compatible ps3 set-ups.
Fact: Sony isn't selling those games, Atlus, Capcom, Konami, and NipponIchi are.
Fact: Blaming Sony for milking remakes when the names ATLUS, CAPCOM, KONAMI, and NIPPONICHI are mentioned is like you have no idea what those companies do.

I suggest you look at technology like the stuff in Rosetta before saying stuff like that.

Emulation technology is more than adequate, Sony and Microsoft did a half-arsed effort.

 

[Still Life]

Bottom line.

PS2 emulation was shit. It was utter and complete shit. It was unreliable and didn't work for most games.
XBox 360 emulation wasn't even good for farkin' Halo for gossake.

I think the technical barriers between each successive console generation are becoming less and less. The current generation of consoles have effectively morphed into closed-platform personal computers which require consumers to be constantly hooked to the internet in order to receive the highest quality out of the products.

Emulation has been around for a little while now and it's becoming more and more efficient as better programing tools are being developed and the demand for backwards compatibility for software grows. Apple have been using emulation tools since the early 90s for each iteration of software and for cross-platform emulation. PCs in general can use simple emulators to run programs from the 80s, or run PS1 games.

What I'm trying to say is that there is potential for BC on future consoles because the technical barriers are being broken by huge advancements in hardware and programing APIs. BC is becoming easier to implement and it's something I'd like to see more of in the future because it's a blast to fire up an old game on my PC.

 

[Rawne1980]

Space saving snip of joy.

And what if we can't.

So the argument here is that people are pissed that bought a new generation of console and they struggle to play games that were optimised for old hardware?

Do I even need to point out the madness of that argument?

There are some games that work from ye olde Xbox on the 360 but if they don't all work then oh well.

If you can't have both machines then thats hardly Microsofts fault.

I'm not defending them, they hardly need my help, I just think it's an insane argument. Of course some games, that were made for old hardware, will not work on newer machines.

That is just common bloody sense.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Space saving snip of joy.

And what if we can't.

So the argument here is that people are pissed that bought a new generation of console and they struggle to play games that were optimised for old hardware?

Do I even need to point out the madness of that argument?

There are some games that work from ye olde Xbox on the 360 but if they don't all work then oh well.

If you can't have both machines then thats hardly Microsofts fault.

I'm not defending them, they hardly need my help, I just think it's an insane argument. Of course some games, that were made for old hardware, will not work on newer machines.

That is just common bloody sense.

So why could Apple deliver emulation tech that made PPC code run *PERFECTLY* on Intel machines? What, are you saying that Apple has more advanced technology than Microsoft ever will?

Emulation technology is more than enough, Sony and Microsoft were just Lazy.

 

[Sprinal]

SOLUTION!!!

DO NOT BUY CONSOLS

You see if you were to buy a PC (which will cost a little more but not a TV so it evens out) you can still play games from the '80's. Which is (in my opinion) Bacwards compatible.

It is a solution and is in the process giving Microsoft/Sony a headache.

Win Win?!

 

[Rawne1980]

Yet more space saving snipping.

So why could Apple deliver emulation tech that made PPC code run *PERFECTLY* on Intel machines? What, are you saying that Apple has more advanced technology than Microsoft ever will?

Emulation technology is more than enough, Sony and Microsoft were just Lazy.

Then it comes down to that "entitlement" argument I see people throw around.

Is it really the job of Sony and Microsoft to make their machines backwards compatible?

As the industry moves forward they lose interest in the older games. That isn't going to make them any money.

I'm not saying it's right but they are a business and the whole point of business is to make money.

Now if they released emulation, as you say, then people would expect it for free. That would mean they lose money from selling the older games for download.

Again, it may not be right but do expect anything else from companies like Microsoft and Sony?

 

[shadowmagus]

Nintendo called to remind us that the Nintendo, SNES, N64, and game cube were all not backwards compatible with each previous generation, lack of backwards compatibility is not a new thing.

 

[NLS]

It's just not fair. The PS2 had backwards compatibility. And the only reason the Wii has to have a digital n64 store is because they couldn't fit a cartridge holder on top, and even then they still made it backwards compatible with the gamecube. Although it is kind of noble of sony to try and lower the prices of the ps3 for the customer now that I'm fully informed.

But that still does not excuse the manufacturer of the one system I have, the xbox 360. Is there any reason I can't play midway arcade treasures anymore, but Halo 2 is still fully functional? Bullshit. That kind of exclusion should not be allowed.

The Wii is basically just an upgraded Gamecube, and thus works fine for backwards compatibility. However, the Xbox 360 uses an entirely different processor architecture than the original Xbox, and such, it needs to emulate every game executable. These are custom to every game and there's already about 480 of them, but they won't continue doing all this extra work for every goddamn game, because it takes time and money.

 

[Khada]

PC is backwards compatible >

 

[MorphingDragon]

Cannot be shipped to my country.

PS1s are a rarity, it wont be too long until the same is of PS2s and Xbox's

I found a new xbox in literally 30 seconds to prove a point on a forum, I'm pretty sure with even the smallest amount of digging you'll find a site you can actually use.

Besides, it's not the fault of the game companies that these things get old and eventually die. But that's true of technology as a whole, did you honestly think that when you were playing on your ps1 that it would never ever become obsolete?

Besides, you can still find and play the damn games, what exactly are you complaining at?

So what about the time when we won't be able to easily find replacements, like the PSX now. There are games I can't buy on PSN, and I'm on my 5th PS1.

Yet more space saving snipping.

So why could Apple deliver emulation tech that made PPC code run *PERFECTLY* on Intel machines? What, are you saying that Apple has more advanced technology than Microsoft ever will?

Emulation technology is more than enough, Sony and Microsoft were just Lazy.

Then it comes down to that "entitlement" argument I see people throw around.

Is it really the job of Sony and Microsoft to make their machines backwards compatible?

As the industry moves forward they lose interest in the older games. That isn't going to make them any money.

I'm not saying it's right but they are a business and the whole point of business is to make money.

Now if they released emulation, as you say, then people would expect it for free. That would mean they lose money from selling the older games for download.

Again, it may not be right but do expect anything else from companies like Microsoft and Sony?

Microsoft bend over backwards to ensure backwards compatibility in Windows, a much much more complex piece of software. An emulation engine would be trivial in comparison.

 

[Spoon E11]

This is the real reason that the PC is the home of the Gaming Master Race.

Except the games that I want to play came with 16 bit installers and now that I have a 64-bit OS it's impossible to play them.

Out of interest which games?

Namely: Star wars episode 1 podracer.

there were some others but I cant remember them

 

[DracoSuave]

Here is some internet. Help yourself.

Cannot be shipped to my country.

PS1s are a rarity, it wont be too long until the same is of PS2s and Xbox's

Becareful what you ask for.

Backwards compatibility is good.... if it works well. PS2's BC was awesome. As an above poster mentioned, it's because it could run PS1 games in the native code, and so it had very little translation to do.

The thing is... ps3s and xbox 360s don't use the same architecture. They're not using a ps2 as a sound chip or an xbox as a video toaster or whatever. That means emulation.

The truth of emulation is this: It takes a LONG time to get to the point where it's a passible substitute. Both the XBOX 360 and BC PS3s have long lists of games they simply won't work with. Why? Emulation requires a LOT of debugging. Tricks and shortcuts used with the original processor might not work with the emulation because, well, it's not using a processor.

It's a simple fact that it's expensive to perform, and it isn't necessarily a great value for the consumer. It's good if you want to introduce a system to new customers with the old software... but for old customers, they already have the new system, and many new customers don't care about old games.

It just doesn't sell enough systems to justify the expense.

I guess moral relativism comes into play here but, to my point of view, lying is immoral. They removed the hardware-based backward compatibility to cut costs, and replaced it with software-base (emulation). Then they removed that, citing as one of the reasons, that emulating for PS2 games was too taxing on the (remaining) hardware. Yet now, they sell emulated PS2 games on PSN. So apparently it's only taxing on the hardware when they're NOT trying to resell us the same games we've already bought.

Fact: Three of the four games did not work for either backwards compatible ps3 set-ups.
Fact: Sony isn't selling those games, Atlus, Capcom, Konami, and NipponIchi are.
Fact: Blaming Sony for milking remakes when the names ATLUS, CAPCOM, KONAMI, and NIPPONICHI are mentioned is like you have no idea what those companies do.

I suggest you look at technology like the stuff in Rosetta before saying stuff like that.

Emulation technology is more than adequate, Sony and Microsoft did a half-arsed effort.

This isn't a star trek universe. It costs time and money to make an emulator work. Just because one company spent the time and money to do so out of necessity doesn't mean that it's viable for a completely different KIND of business which lacks that necessity.

Microsoft bend over backwards to ensure backwards compatibility in Windows, a much much more complex piece of software. An emulation engine would be trivial in comparison.

Each iteration of Windows is using the same instruction sets, with additional features added on, and current features made more robust. The thing is, a program is still calling the same functions, more or less. The x86 processor hasn't changed its instruction set since the PC came out, so the same assembly will work with it so long as they keep making it.

Contrast the Emotion Engine with the Cell Processors. Completely different instruction sets on the processor level, with completely different OS functions to call.

Windows hasn't changed so much that old Windows or even DOS stuff is unrecognizable... A system with Dos 3.0 has way more in common with Windows Vista systems, than a PS2 has with a PS3. The only similarity is the PS logo.

 

[Robert Ewing]

Yeah, This is the thing that really pisses me off about them. It's not especially hard, nor expensive to add backward compatibility... And I don't see why they CAN'T include it, it just seems like they're punishing their customers for some shit reason, buy a worse, older model for backwards compatibility, or get a newer model with slightly improved software, CHOOSE PEON.

 

[MysticToast]

Wow. Just wow.... I'm so freaking sick and tired of seeing people on this website whine like "wahhh why can't my console do everything *I* want it to do?!"

I'd go into detail about why you're so wrong but many people have stated so already in this thread. Get over yourselves.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

No seriously, who else has noticed this crap? It's easy to spot. My 360 can't play most of the original xbox games excluding of course ones co-produced by microsoft. I heard sony isn't putting backwards compatibility into any of the new ps3s, but both companies ARE selling games from those systems as digital content so you'll have to buy them again. What a load of shit. It's extortion. Or at the very least they're intentionally gouging you. Why the fuck do we put up with this? Why are we letting them make it so we can't play our old games until we buy them again from some digital store? We need to send them a message. Backwards compatibility or no money for you!

And being a business does not excuse them from this shit. For fucks sake, at this point, the mafia is technically a business since they also do whatever they can to make money.

Someone does not have much in the way of a technical background methinks.

The architecture of systems changes, often radically. Look at how a lot of the backward-compatibility is managed right now and you immediately see the problem. The Wii is a great example - the Wii internals don't just magically play Gamecube games, it has what amounts to a good portion of a Gamecube stuffed into the case alongside the Wii internals, components that do absolutely nothing when you play actual Wii games. Other systems use emulation to enable backwards compatibility, but emulation can be an incredibly costly (in terms of processing, not money) thing to do.

The reason they're not putting backwards compatibility isn't that they're trying to screw you over, it's that backwards compatibility does not come for free. At all. Often it doesn't even come for cheap.

Also, I've always felt like backwards compatibility, while nice, was pretty superfluous.

Solution: Buy a plastic bin. Put old systems in it. If you want to play something on one, go open the bin.

And if you don't have the old system, set aside bizarre notions that you should be allowed to play games from it for free just because you bought a newer console and go find one on ebay for $10. Old systems are cheap.

Yeah, This is the thing that really pisses me off about them. It's not especially hard, nor expensive to add backward compatibility... And I don't see why they CAN'T include it, it just seems like they're punishing their customers for some shit reason, buy a worse, older model for backwards compatibility, or get a newer model with slightly improved software, CHOOSE PEON.

See above. I will never understand why people who don't actually know that it's easy insist that it must be. Also, it's not really an either/or thing for the purchase - old consoles tend to be more or less free.

 

[DracoSuave]

It's not especially hard, nor expensive to add backward compatibility.

You are very wrong.

The PS2 and PS3 have nothing to do with each other in terms of hardware. There's no similarities, and the only way to make backwards compatibility is full-on emulation.

Full-on emulation takes a LOT of work to make bug-free. Ask anyone who's been in the emulation community for a while... take a super nintendo emulator for example. People can point at one and go 'Well, this is perfect! They just need to do that!'

Shit took over a decade to get right. It's been around longer than windows.