kaczmar
Member
Just curious. Do you have examples of this?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Has the market dictated that backwards compatibility is required now (PS5?)
- Thread starter Chinbo37
- Start date
Just curious. Do you have examples of this?
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
Exactly.
All real world data at hand demonstrates that BC isn't remotely important to a platform's market-level success. You have just said so yourself in an earlier sentence.
Now you're saying it is.
This is not a consistent argument.
No I'm not. Mainstream digital adoption has been around since last gen, as pointed out earlier.
Off the top of my head, every defunct MMO and also SecureROM DRM'd games not running on Windows 10.
Last edited:
LordOfChaos
Member
In previous generations, I may have agreed, where BC is done through added hardware cost, or else partial libraries through software with some manual effort required.
This time though, I have a big fully digital PS4 library, and I'd love to carry it forward to a better box, it would make me more likely to day one it, otherwise I'll stick to finishing my older games on my then last gen console for a while.
It's also not like before because the hardware between gens will be the most compatible ever. 8 x86 cores to 8 more powerful x86 cores, GCN graphics to [probably] still GCN based far more powerful graphics, big unified memory pool to even bigger higher bandwidth memory pool etc etc. there should be no hardware hampers to BC and no added cost for it so I'd find it harder to forgive.
For PS4 games it could serve as a PS4 Pro Pro, but with PS5 exclusives as well.
Last edited:
Toe-Knee
Member
You arent alone. I got the most part don't go back to old games. The only ones I do are from the dreamcast and saturn.
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
Excuse me for derailing briefly. I'd like to say a couple of things:
- I'm not against the idea of BC at all. If it falls into my lap I'll be delighted. I'm playing devil's advocate and seeing how likely this is from a business standpoint. In my experience, things with a solid business justification tend to be more likely to happen than those without.
- Thank you to the other participants in this discussion, particularly the OP
Chinbo37
and
Hostile_18
, for such an engaging back-and-forth. 
- I'm not against the idea of BC at all. If it falls into my lap I'll be delighted. I'm playing devil's advocate and seeing how likely this is from a business standpoint. In my experience, things with a solid business justification tend to be more likely to happen than those without.
- Thank you to the other participants in this discussion, particularly the OP
Chinbo37
and
Hostile_18
, for such an engaging back-and-forth.
Last edited:
Iced Arcade
Member
BC in the past hasn't been a big thing for me BUT this gen to last gen was the smallest jump in terms of games and a lot of last gen games hold up extremely well.
without a doubt I expect the PS5 to BC PS4 games seeing it will most likely be x86 again
without a doubt I expect the PS5 to BC PS4 games seeing it will most likely be x86 again
Hostile_18
Banned
It has been an interesting subject to debate .
My point about backwards compatability not been important last gen is simply because MS showing was so awful. If both consoles were roughly equal (i.e no major miss-steps) then I'd contend it would have been important. But in 2018 even more so, with likely no major hardware revisions and a large customer base out there with huge digital libraries.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but it was only this gen a digital release on launch day for every title was mandated on both platforms. Also last gen digital sales were less than say 10% where's now it's equal or in some cases even greater than physical sales.
Exclusives do go along way in deciding a customers loyalty but at the beginning of a gen, this would be a real hook. Financially it is in their interest that as many people make the transisition to next gen as soon as possible, removing a barrier to entry is going to do that. The more people that buy digital the better as well as the margins are higher for all concerned. What better way to get the ball rolling than having a preinstalled user base ready to buy your new machine. Who after all would want to hit the reset button when your a market leader, when the tech is there now to avoid that.
.My point about backwards compatability not been important last gen is simply because MS showing was so awful. If both consoles were roughly equal (i.e no major miss-steps) then I'd contend it would have been important. But in 2018 even more so, with likely no major hardware revisions and a large customer base out there with huge digital libraries.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but it was only this gen a digital release on launch day for every title was mandated on both platforms. Also last gen digital sales were less than say 10% where's now it's equal or in some cases even greater than physical sales.
Exclusives do go along way in deciding a customers loyalty but at the beginning of a gen, this would be a real hook. Financially it is in their interest that as many people make the transisition to next gen as soon as possible, removing a barrier to entry is going to do that. The more people that buy digital the better as well as the margins are higher for all concerned. What better way to get the ball rolling than having a preinstalled user base ready to buy your new machine. Who after all would want to hit the reset button when your a market leader, when the tech is there now to avoid that.
CloudStrife_ca
Member
I think everyone this gen has picked up atleast one remaster, I hope PS5 will be backwards compatible with the PS4, if its not we're all too kind of blame. Why throw in that feature for free when they can remaster games with minimal dev costs and make good money off those remasters while they're at it.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
I have a sizable library of physical games stretching back to the NES era. You'd think that I would celebrate backwards compatibility, but as the years progress I am less and less interested in the idea.
Since I'm comfortable retaining old hardware, I'd rather have that hardware focused on the games designed for it. Pretty straightforward. Nothing controversial about that.
"But what about consoles that do offer it? Aren't they better?"
Well, actually no. They're not. See, I have delved deep enough into these systems (as have many other gamers) and realize that almost every example of backwards compatibility is mediocre, at best. There are countless PS1 games that perform worse when played on a PS2 or PS3. There are Xbox and Xbox 360 games that cannot be played on their successors, and among the games that can be played many of them have performance issues. SEGA... SEGA just sucks. The lack of SEGA CD -> Saturn and/or Saturn -> Dreamcast compatibility is a huge sore spot for me. SEGA's hardware quality is pretty darn good so perhaps in another universe they did it correctly.
You know who did BC correctly? Nintendo. Super Game Boy and Game Boy Player were both excellent pieces of hardware, and the Game Boy line did a great job of supporting older cartridges. But Nintendo is the only one who has been consistently great with BC. Sony and Microsoft have half-assed it.
And then there's the added problem of compatibility with modern televisions. It's not such an issue now, but there are still plenty of games on 360 and PS3 (mostly shmups) that are better on a VGA display at 480p. If you don't have this hardware -- or worse, if you're playing the game on a modern system that doesn't support older displays -- then you're playing a worse version of that old game.
I understand the convenience of it all, but it just hasn't payed off for me yet. I'm fine buying and preserving the old systems instead of demanding the new companies make their new systems compatible.
Since I'm comfortable retaining old hardware, I'd rather have that hardware focused on the games designed for it. Pretty straightforward. Nothing controversial about that.
"But what about consoles that do offer it? Aren't they better?"
Well, actually no. They're not. See, I have delved deep enough into these systems (as have many other gamers) and realize that almost every example of backwards compatibility is mediocre, at best. There are countless PS1 games that perform worse when played on a PS2 or PS3. There are Xbox and Xbox 360 games that cannot be played on their successors, and among the games that can be played many of them have performance issues. SEGA... SEGA just sucks. The lack of SEGA CD -> Saturn and/or Saturn -> Dreamcast compatibility is a huge sore spot for me. SEGA's hardware quality is pretty darn good so perhaps in another universe they did it correctly.
You know who did BC correctly? Nintendo. Super Game Boy and Game Boy Player were both excellent pieces of hardware, and the Game Boy line did a great job of supporting older cartridges. But Nintendo is the only one who has been consistently great with BC. Sony and Microsoft have half-assed it.
And then there's the added problem of compatibility with modern televisions. It's not such an issue now, but there are still plenty of games on 360 and PS3 (mostly shmups) that are better on a VGA display at 480p. If you don't have this hardware -- or worse, if you're playing the game on a modern system that doesn't support older displays -- then you're playing a worse version of that old game.
I understand the convenience of it all, but it just hasn't payed off for me yet. I'm fine buying and preserving the old systems instead of demanding the new companies make their new systems compatible.
Hotel Security
Member
Yes, but none of that "retaining a large player base" has anything to do with them having BC or not. Since a VAST majority of people do not give two shits about BC.
And the cost compared to the rest of the project is irrelevant. Any business will assess the individual costs of each feature of a system and have to do a cost analysis on whether it's worth it. If they can't really tie the addition of BC to creating real extra value and profits for a system then they won't do it.
Also, you're very much underestimating the costs of adding BC to a console and the cost to maintain it and keep it working. You're just denying it's expensive for the sake of argument.
You're also ignoring the fact that developers (and Sony) can make much more money just re-selling "remastered" versions of these games via retail and make FAR more money than they would by adding BC. This is a huge thing that was not a factor just a few years ago before this whole "let's just re-release old games" craze got going. They'd be flat-out stupid to allow players to play these old games on a PS5. That's just plain bad business and, as we often forget, these companies are businesses.
Probably the best point made here so far. There's no precedent for BC being some major factor in the sales of any console. The Wii U had complete perfect 100% backwards compatibility (and not the half-assed selective version we get from Sony/MS) and the console was awful and a joke and sold poorly. In fact, I didn't even buy a Wii because I knew I could get a Wii U and play all old Wii games. Nintendo lost sales on a Wii console because they added BC. Sure, my story isn't common, but it's a factor.
You can contend all you want but you don't have a lick of evidence or previous precedent from the past to support this point. Even using straight logic, it doesn't make sense.
And for all those asking for BC, is it really THAT hard to just not sell your old consoles and games? You don't even make that much on selling games back anyway. Just put them in a box and toss it into storage and hold onto your games and you'll never give a shit or need BC. Seems to me that's much easier than being pissed off when a company doesn't include BC.
Last edited:
CloudStrife_ca
Member
I'm in the same boat with large collection of physical media going back abit further than yours going back as far as the Atari 2600. You're probably right too, b/c has felt a bit half assed and because I also have all my old consoles, all setup, in good working order, I can dive into the retro library of last gen or further whenever. Its nice and convenient to have but its not the biggest thing in the world to me either at this point.
For the record Nintendo did great with b/c as well when allowing Gamecube games to play on the Wii.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
Good point. Playing Gamecube on Wii and playing the Wii on the Wii U is really impressive when you consider that you can still use the old controllers, too. Pretty darn good.
Hostile_18
Banned
Straight logic... Jimbo has a collection of games. He has a choice between two consoles one will carry over all his old games and one will not. He goes with the one that does. How is that not logical.
I don't want to go to much in the past as I think the market has changed considerably the last 7 years as I detailed earlier. But if you want an example PlayStation 2 is one of the best selling consoles of all time and that was fully backwards compatible.
Yes there's a percentage of people who don't care about carrying their games forward but even if it was 10-20% that do (I think it's a hell of a lot more) that's still alot of money left on the table. Why wouldn't these manufacturers do everything in their power to try and grow their day 1 install base and incentivise digital sales going forward into this new gen. It's a fact digital sale growth is outpacing physical sale growth is it not. It would damage consumer confidence if they thought all their purchases where for "nothing" at the end of each life cycle. Which to be fair isn't THAT unfair on their behalf given how much digital sales have been pushed by both Sony and Microsoft. Everyone wants to keep what they perceive as owning, even if technically in a legal sense they don't.
Steam does it right and yeah PC is it's own thing, but console gaming for years now has been moving into that space. It's not unreasonable the same expectations should be applied.
Last edited:
Gamernyc78
Banned
Sony had bc in ps3 not many cared and i believe stats were brought forward at some point to show the low number of ppl that actually used bc during that time. Now xbox one has bc for select games and if Sony doesnt have it its make or break?
Listen some ppl care about bc but majority dont. The market has dictated to the contrary, remakes sell very well and Sony is killing it without bc and will do so even if bc isnt a ps5 feature. However im sure ps5 will have bc.
Listen some ppl care about bc but majority dont. The market has dictated to the contrary, remakes sell very well and Sony is killing it without bc and will do so even if bc isnt a ps5 feature. However im sure ps5 will have bc.
DaleinCalgary
Member
I don't think the average gamer cares about playing games from 5-10 years ago.
Grinchy
Banned
I think BC with PS4 is important this time in a way it was never important before. People don't just have very expensive digital libraries now, they also have a lot of in-game purchases within their most heavily played games. If you're Sony, you don't want those kinds of people to hold off on PS5 because they don't want to lose those kinds of things.
The best case scenario is that people who want a PS5 and still want to have access to their digital library, in-game items, VR content, ect, will be able to use all of that the same day they trade their PS4 into gamestop to get a PS5. And consumers will be able to do that without any barrier if they know that they have all those years worth of purchases ready to go on top of the inevitably sparse launch lineup of PS5 games.
From what I understand from a technical standpoint (which may be wrong), the PS5 won't need any kind of extra dedicated hardware inside of it to play PS4 games. If that's the case, it's not an expense for Sony and has only upsides for getting consumers on board with transitioning and staying inside the Playstation ecosystem.
The best case scenario is that people who want a PS5 and still want to have access to their digital library, in-game items, VR content, ect, will be able to use all of that the same day they trade their PS4 into gamestop to get a PS5. And consumers will be able to do that without any barrier if they know that they have all those years worth of purchases ready to go on top of the inevitably sparse launch lineup of PS5 games.
From what I understand from a technical standpoint (which may be wrong), the PS5 won't need any kind of extra dedicated hardware inside of it to play PS4 games. If that's the case, it's not an expense for Sony and has only upsides for getting consumers on board with transitioning and staying inside the Playstation ecosystem.
LordOfChaos
Member
What about 6 months ago? Or even less, for the final swan songs of this gen.
Heck, the PS4 could conceivably get great third party titles after the 5 launches, happens all the time.
PS4 games won't all be old when the PS5 launches...I have a fully digital library and full BC with all of it with the 5 running the enhancements the Pro already got or more, would definitely entice me to upgrade, if it didn't happen I'd wait it out for a more fleshed out library and to run out of 8th gen games.
Chinbo37
Member
You are drawing conclusions based on faulty logic.
Neither the PS4 or XBONE nor the Switch launched with BC. Had all three launched with BC then your point would be valid.
The market dictated the PS4 was the better machine with better games. BC compatiblitity which was introduced recently on teh XBONE wasnt going to change that drastically.
The question will be for the next generation. So when I ask "has the market dictated" I mean going forward for next gen.
Strife In a Teacup
Member
Was that a CD-RW pun?
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
If you're asking what the market has dictated, you can only use things that have happened up to present day.
In which case, the answer is yes, they've dictated that the presence of BC doesn't matter at a market level. Either at launch or being introduced (or removed) later.
If you're asking for things that have not yet happened then there's no answer. The market can't tell you what they've dictated about a future that is not yet upon us.
It's a wonky premise because anyone can refute any answer on the basis that it's unproven.
Last edited:
Koala Driving a Ferrari
Member
The PS5 will be backwards compatible with PS4. This isn't debatable; it's the future of the console industry. Mark Cerny isn't a total monkey and Sony loves back compat. Hell, they have launched a majority of their consoles with it in the past.
Last edited:
Klart
Member
I hope and think Sony will make the PS5 BC with PS4.
BC for PS3 was difficult as the architecture difference ment Sony pretty much had to build a PS3 into the PS4.
This problem seems to be gone now.
People these days will also expect their digital content to carry over, much like between smartphones/PC. Lots of people say the next gen might be the last gen, so keeping your digital content is even more important.
And Sony might earn some bucks by reselling old games, the customer loyalty they’d create through BC also has financial value. A new gen of consoles is always a risk to lose customers, with BC this is somewhat mitigated.
BC for PS3 was difficult as the architecture difference ment Sony pretty much had to build a PS3 into the PS4.
This problem seems to be gone now.
People these days will also expect their digital content to carry over, much like between smartphones/PC. Lots of people say the next gen might be the last gen, so keeping your digital content is even more important.
And Sony might earn some bucks by reselling old games, the customer loyalty they’d create through BC also has financial value. A new gen of consoles is always a risk to lose customers, with BC this is somewhat mitigated.
TheWatcher
Banned
I don't understand how people can dislike or even hate this feature. I mean are more consumer options bad? PS4 and Xbox One should have been BC from the beginning.
Hostile_18
Banned
Plus only certain MASSIVE titles would sell well when released each gen (Skyrim, Resi 4 etc). Many did well sufficiently to have one re-release but wouldn't be justified in been re-released again. It's not in anyones interest to have those titles lost to time.
tryDEATH
Member
Reading some of these comments in here is really mind blowing. Sony has actually managed to turn their own customer base in loathing people that spite themselves by arguing a position that is against their own best interest. This must truly be the pinnacle of fanboyism. We getting close to Trump level mania where they could end up taking your digital games away from you and some how Sony would still end up getting more popular among its base as they simply can't do anything wrong in their eyes.
No blu-ray player. Check
No Cross-play. Check
No Backwards compatibility. Check
No affordable consumer friendly services. Check
No blu-ray player. Check
No Cross-play. Check
No Backwards compatibility. Check
No affordable consumer friendly services. Check
Trogdor1123
Member
Real question, if ps4 had BC would we still have demon souls servers? That's the only real question that matters
FranXico
Member
One does not guarantee the other. In fact, let me ask you a better question. Let's pretend that even the Warhawk servers were still up and that the PS4 could run PS3 games.
Online multiplayer is free on the PS3, but I want to play Warhawk on a PS4. Should I be able to play it without PS+ or not? Food for thought.
That's funny. I feel exactly the same about online multiplayer paywalls, which thanks to the "pinnacle of fanboyism" have indeed become standard. So, thank you.
Trogdor1123
Member
Totally forgot about Warhawk... Love that game! It should 100% be one of the first BC games!
I think I might go on a retro experience for the next year. Got my SNES mini loaded with games and like 100 ps3 games I haven't even touched...
Come on Sony! Save us and give us BC or way more remasters!
tryDEATH
Member
You pay what you get, Xbox Live was always a premium service even compared to PC in its early days, remember you couldn't get online with out a ethernet connection, which in itself was considered a luxury that cost $100/month. They differentiated themselves from the rest and actually continued to innovated on that platform. You got unparalleled stability, reliability, and features. It is about making decisions that allow you to make innovations that your consumer base can benefit from, not block them from enjoying your eco-system. Remember the Sony Network hack that is what you get with free services that don't have commitment from developers.
Sony basically slapped a $60 price tag on a free service they offered. You still can't change you gamertag/username for crying out loud. Remember the Sony Network hack that is what you get with free services that don't have commitment from developers.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
The average gamer is still playing and buying a game (GTAV) from 5-10 years ago though
Ozrimandias
Member
In my opinion, Backwards Capabilty is more important than Crossplay.
I think that Backwards Capability its not a factor or a valuable feature that can raise sales in potential costumers, the evidence its in Xbox One, Ps3 or WiiU but its more important to increase loyalty in your actual consumer. I have a large amount of digital games from PS1, PS2 and PS3, its frustrating not play them in my PS4; Sony force me to play them in a PS3, an obsolete piece of hardware with no support.
I think that Backwards Capability its not a factor or a valuable feature that can raise sales in potential costumers, the evidence its in Xbox One, Ps3 or WiiU but its more important to increase loyalty in your actual consumer. I have a large amount of digital games from PS1, PS2 and PS3, its frustrating not play them in my PS4; Sony force me to play them in a PS3, an obsolete piece of hardware with no support.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I am inclined to say no, but given how many people have taken the all digital plunge, I am now moving to say YES to make PS4 games playable on PS5.
I do think its a moot point though as I expect future consoles will adopt something similar to iphone/galaxy in that every upgrade will revolve around similar (or at least compatible) architecture so all older games can play without any sort of emulation.
I do think its a moot point though as I expect future consoles will adopt something similar to iphone/galaxy in that every upgrade will revolve around similar (or at least compatible) architecture so all older games can play without any sort of emulation.
radewagon
Member
No Bluray Player:
Actually, it does have a Bluray player. What it does not have is a UHD player. I imagine that most people don't care about this because they either A) have no 4k TV, B) no longer buy physical movies, C) find the 4k spec confusing, D) don't see a legitimate upgrade in UHD's offerings, E) already have a UHD player, or F) just don't care for movies. Like it or not (and I happen to like UHD's), UHD's are still very much a niche market. Honestly, I wish it weren't, but it's easy to see why Sony fanboys might not care about a format that is outpaced at Walmart by DVD's.
No Cross-play:
Sony has chosen to brand itself as a company that delivers unique narrative driven single player experiences. When a company defines itself with titles like God of War, Horizon, and The Last of Us, is it any wonder that Sony fanboys don't really care about crossplay?
No Backwards Compatibility:
This is a tough one. I think most fanboys are aware that BC with PS3 would be very difficult given the PS3's relative age and its unique architecture. As for why we don't have full BC for PSone and PS2, I'm legitimately ticked off that they have overlooked compatibility with those titles.
No affordable consumer friendly services:
No complaints here. I've never had a problem with Sony's services. I'm not saying that other people haven't. I KNOW other people have had some bad experiences, but I would imagine that a majority of Sony's users don't experience any serious (or small) issues with the service they are provided.
I'm not sure if I proved my point or yours, but I just wanted to address your list. It was a strange one. I feel like the things you view as significant issues are fairly irrelevant to most Sony gamers. As for the BC, as I stated, it's important to me and that's why I purchased my first Xbox ever when the X1X came out. The BC on it has been the gold standard for BC.
Helios
Member
A bit late to the discussion but
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzZ8jigea0Ph0pgUgrX5U-Q/videos . These are only a fraction of the games killed in the last 2 years. The guy hates any game that requires an online connection for these very reasons and wants to look into legal ways to stop companies from killing video games.
Sleepydays
Banned
I had bought PS 1/2 games on PS3 with the expectation that I'd be able to play them when I got a PS4 (reasonable given their cross-purchase policy and ability to play PSX titles on PSP/Vita). That they didn't do this hasn't been forgotten by me. If PS5 doesn't allow me to play at least my PS4 purchases and Xbox carries their BC into the next gen, I'll be switching to MS.
The game industry is constantly plundering its past, so there's some evidence to the contrary.
Meanwhile, console manufacturers are always looking to promote brand loyalty. An easy way to do that is to create a continuity among its releases with backward compatibility. It's also a nice bonus for fans who've supported a platform over years and across multiple consoles.
S
SLoWMoTIoN
Unconfirmed Member
"People don't want to play their older games on a newer faster console with a better remote and having these titles available at launch is dumb. Who cares if most launches have no games or are remasters? Furthermore I'm ok with remasters and onlive services."
Are some of you legit touched in the head or are just company shills?
Are some of you legit touched in the head or are just company shills?
kaczmar
Member
I think you are both right. I'm not interested in playing Resident Evil 2 on my original PS2, but I'm very interested in playing the remake/remaster on my PS4.
WaterAstro
Member
You're missing some facts in that logic.
When the generations end and we see all the new games that had came out for each console, if Xbone still has a lacking library of new, compelling games, then backwards compatibility won't mean shit. You have to factor in new games into the equation, which is why PS4 is dominating right now.
Also, Xbone BC costs money to make it work. It doesn't just automatically work. Microsoft is spending money to make sure each title works with the Xbone, and that's why it's rolling out slowly for select titles. That means they don't have complete focus on new games.
TheWatcher
Banned
Yeah all those great 'new' games on the PS4 when it came out. I would have rather had the option to pop in my PS3 Killzone 2 and 3 discs than subject myself to Killzone Shadowfall. I don't understand this whole 'new' games argument when you consider that a substantial amount of games on both consoles are re-masters. We are 5 years into this 'new' generation and developers are still scouring their libraries to push out re-makes. PS4 has the distinction of being the best console in probably the most unoriginal and redundant console generation, Bravo! Now go enjoy all the new Sony games, which mostly happen to be sequels. Fact is BC is a great feature, and anybody that argues that it isn't is an anti-consumer parrot.
itsjustJEFF
Member
... based on how Sony approached the development of the PS4 and the messaging of the PS4, that would lead me to believe that they learned from their PS3 mistakes. It's not luck that they revealed the PS4 months before the X1, it's not luck that they messaged that initial reveal like the way they did. They had a plan and that plan was vastly different from what the X1's plan was, at the time. At the beginning of this generation the Sony's "plan" was what appealed to more gamers.
Is it possible that the PS5 is not BC? Yes, it's possible. Is it likely? I don't know. Why? If the rumors are correct and they keep the x86 architecture there won't be a lot of barriers for BC. The PS3's cell processor was a major headache to code for, you couldn't just throw code at it, you had to code specifically for the cell architecture. The PS4 is not powerful enough, at least from what i've heard, to brute force PS3 games to make them BC. They, Sony, would have to manually rework the code for every game, that would be dedicating resources there and that could have ate into other parts of Playstation. Not the same story as the X1 & 360, there is still work required but much less.
Hotel Security
Member
If what you said was true, then the Wii U would not have been a disaster and all the folks who bought the Wii would have stayed loyal and got a Wii U since it was 100% backwards compatible. History states that this is not the case.
Like many, you seem to be overestimating the fans. A VAST majority of gamers do not give two shits about BC. People like us bickering about it on a message board are the minority. It would not have changed a thing in terms of total sales and it never does and there is no evidence of BC ever making a difference in this way ever.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll