• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

How important is backwards compatibility to you?

I'd like to believe it's very important to me, but I still keep my old consoles to buy and play older titles, so not as much. For those saying that it doesn't matter, is it because you don't want to play games that are older you've never touched, do you just want to keep up with the latest and greatest, or playing older games just doesn't fancy you enough?

A saving grace for all this is emulation on the computer and thankfully there are many talented and very dedicated souls who want to preserve consoles.
 
The main reasons I am a PC gamer primarily are mods and near eternal backwards compatibility, in no particular order. So extremely important. Even on the console side, without it I'd never have been able to play the GameCube and GBA games I missed, which would have been tragic.
 
Literally 0%.

If you're buying a new console to spend more time playing older games on it, you made a questionable purchase to begin with.
Consoles cost dirt cheap at the end of a generation anyway, so it's not hard to find a new/used one if you really want to play them.
 
It used to be a deal breaker when the PS3 and 360 first launched. Until I realized that in the NES, SNES, Sega era there was very lil backwards compatibility.

Now it isnt even on a want, dont want list. I too have a fat model PS2, big back box Xbox so I'm straight. I just replaced a broke down fat model PS3 (lasted 6 years) with the super slim last week......and finally got the PS4 the same day.

I am thinking about selling the PS3 because I got it at a good discount, sell it with all my PS3 games. Need to finish some games on it first tho after I do a data transfer to the super slim.
 
jroc74 said:
It used to be a deal breaker when the PS3 and 360 first launched. Until I realized that in the NES, SNES, Sega era there was very lil backwards compatibility.

Now it isnt even on a want, dont want list. I too have a fat model PS2, big back box Xbox so I'm straight. I just replaced a broke down fat model PS3 (lasted 6 years) with the super slim last week......and finally got the PS4 the same day.

I am thinking about selling the PS3 because I got it at a good discount, sell it with all my PS3 games. Need to finish some games on it first tho after I do a data transfer to the super slim.
Click to expand...

I might holler at you about that PS3 and those games if everything goes as planned.
 
Very important. It's one of the many reasons why I love my PC and the main reason why I'm passing on current-gen consoles and just sticking with my PS3.
 
It is essential to me. A game system offering only its library and nothing else, at this day and age, doesn't feel right to me. Also, I am not rich and I need to sell my old systems in order to buy new ones, so...
 
Well since I mainly play on PC it hasn't been of big concern to me lately. Yet it would be sad if I would be limited in one way or another to the current-gen library. I still have so many good games to play from the past decade or so.
 
I don't buy a new console until I really and truly done with the one before. Then by the time I want to play the old games again, emulators have swooped in and filled that void.
 
One of the main reasons I play on PC. Plus there is emulation.
I recently played the longest journey, and I'm currently playing baldur's gate 2

If that's not what the OP meant, only console I regularly used was a PS2 (which is collecting dust)
 
Do I badly want it? Yes. Does it matter? No. Seems like all three companies have more-or-less given up on BC and are instead cashing in on remasters.
 
DaciaJC said:
Very important. It's one of the many reasons why I love my PC and the main reason why I'm passing on current-gen consoles and just sticking with my PS3.
Click to expand...

Yup, until Sony implements emulation and some form of BC in its current consoles, I am more than happy trying to deal with the huge backlog of games I bought with the PS1, PS2, and PS3.

Between 3DS and IPad Air 2, and my backlog, I have enough games to last me a long time.
 
no BC is no dealbreaker but its quite important for the first two or three years of the console cycle. for example I have not many things I want to play on Ps4 right now and have plenty of unfinished games on PS3. Would have been splendid if I could use my PS4 to play PS3 games (I am for example playing xenoblade on WiiU at the moment).
stn said:
Do I badly want it? Yes. Does it matter? No. Seems like all three companies have more-or-less given up on BC and are instead cashing in on remasters.
Click to expand...

?? WiiU and 3DS have full BC?
 
Doesn't matter at all. With technology improving and developer teams becoming smarter and leaner with how they make game it is hard for me to go back and play old games.

I would rather pay for remastered games that are known as classics (such as MCC, or KOTOR since I never got the chance to play it and I rather not play it on my laptop). Of course with reasonable prices.
 
Its not important to me at all. Like, if I cared so much about it that it was a deal breaker, I'd miss out on a whole lot of systems. And so I'd say its a totally impractical priority to have.

But it is something I *really* appreciate and is a pretty big selling point.
 
Not really that important, but I'd prefer it if possible.

The only time I wouldn't like it if it's actually bringing the hardware down - like iirc didn't they say they didn't/couldn't improve the touchscreen for the 3DS in order for it to be BC with the DS? Seeing as I have three DSs already, I would have much preferred better hardware over BC.
 
I would love if every console was backwards compatible, if I could stick a disc in or download and play a game from the previous gen on new hardware, only with higher resolution and better performance. One of the joys of PC gaming is getting a new video card and running through your games, turning things up you couldn't, running a game at perfect 60fps where it struggled before, etc, and consoles providing that ability would be fantastic.

But it's obviously not so important that it has prevented me from buying a PS3 or a PS4. So...yeah.
 
JordanN said:
Literally 0%.

If you're buying a new console to spend more time playing older games on it, you made a questionable purchase to begin with.
Consoles cost dirt cheap at the end of a generation anyway, so it's not hard to find a new/used one if you really want to play them.
Click to expand...

The last generation has yet to see a full featured version of any of the consoles at or below 100$ new.
 
I want to play new games on a new console. If i want to play a classic i can mostly find it downloadable.
Only console where it matters are nintendo handhelds.
And even there not too much.
 
Although its convenient and nice to have, its not a dealbreaker at all to my purchasing decision if other factors are at stake like higher price point and more efficient power consumption. If i want to play my old games so much, i'll keep my old consoles. And i do.

In the history of consoles, BC has only been in a few consoles ever really. So seeing it as a standard is really weird to me.
 
if it's the choice between backward's compatibility and a significantly more powerful machine, i'll take the more power every time. Nintendo is a prime example of a hardware producer who's capabilities are being held back by choosing compatibility over innovation.

I'd like to see Nintendo make more daring choices in their future products. With what we know about their QOL initiative... maybe they just will.

For Sony, they just went through a major architecture change, so they may be able to stay on a similar path for the next system or two, making backward's compatibility almost free. I'd like that.
 
It typically isn't a big deal since I keep most of my old hardware but I must admit the lack of BC is a pretty big reason why I haven't bought a PS4. Too many PS3 games that I'm still playing, a bunch of PSOne classics to get though, and 95% of the PS4 games I would play have PS3 versions. Had it been backwards compatible and allowed streaming of PSOne classics I'd most likely own PS4 by now.
 
It's more of a convenience rather than a necessity for me. It is great to have but it not being available won't stop me from buying a system.
 
Very important. Saves cost. I can return old console keep new one and still play old games. Very important and willing to pay little extra for it.
 
While we're on the subject, does the PS4 play PS1 discs?

It's a tradition of mine to play MGS1 on a new PlayStation console and Bloodborne is coming a month from now.
 
I liked backwards compatibility with the Atari 7800 (played 2600 games) and PS2, but it doesn't matter to me.
 
On PC? It's one of the best things on the platform. I love being able to play anything from anytime, be it old DOS games, arcade games, handheld games, console games, or more.

On consoles it's not critical. That is it's more important that the system is as solid as possible. Still, it's one of the nicest features to have and makes a purchase more attractive.
 
It's not a complete dealbreaker for me, although it's a great feature when present. It's nice to know I can pop a Wii game in my Wii U at any time seeing as I never owned one (same with playing DS games on my N3DS), and although I doubt the question really applies to the PC, I'm glad I can play games from pretty much any era on that as well.

I'm looking for a good price on a PS3 at the moment and I'm deliberating as to whether to pick up a PS4 when Bloodborne arrives. If the PS4 had BC, there would be no deliberating.
 
Since i never owned a PS3/X360 and just borrowed it from friends, this PC gamer would loved if PS4/XB1 had BC if one day decided to buy PS4/XB1..
 
Not important for me. When i buy a new console i only care about the new games.
I had a fat ps3 and only ended playing 1 ps2 game on it.

All the other ps2 games i played was remadtered editions made for the ps3.
 
Critical for me, main reason I went PC as my main gaming rig this gen. Experiences in gaming haven't changed so much in my opinion that we have a good reason for a lack of BC.

Until games do something that completely changes the playing field and my main point of input isn't a controller and the main source of output isn't a monitor or TV, I will continue to find backwards compatibilty important.

Once the shift happens and the way we change how we play games, then I'll say "alright old friends, it was fun, but it's off to the holo deck/brain jack/feelingnometer".
 
billymonks said:
Backwards compatibility is very important to anyone who cares about gaming's lineage and has enough taste to not want an inevitable cluttered mess in their entertainment center.
Click to expand...

Pretty much how I feel. BC in some form is pretty much the standard for every content medium except console video games. Console games for some reason are seen as much more transient with less care given to keeping legacy content relevant. Honestly I think that mentality is a leftover from when console games were seen as toys. Does anybody keep an iPod, a CD player, a cassette player, an 8-track player, a record player, AND a reel-to-reel in their house?

BC is even more important now that we have digital distribution. People expect stuff they downloaded to carry over to new machines and operating systems.
 
RedSwirl said:
Pretty much how I feel. BC in some form is pretty much the standard for every content medium except console video games. Console games for some reason are seen as much more transient with less care given to keeping legacy content relevant. Honestly I think that mentality is a leftover from when console games were seen as toys. Does anybody keep an iPod, a CD player, a cassette player, an 8-track player, a record player, AND a reel-to-reel in their house?

BC is even more important now that we have digital distribution. People expect stuff they downloaded to carry over to new machines and operating systems.
Click to expand...

BC is dead... publishers are free to resell you the same games over and over under titles like remaster and HD, a practice that you would have thought would have the gaming communities up in arms racing to get there pitchforks but surprisingly supported it and even beg publishers to make remasters even to this day.

Case and point: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=996776
 
Its very important to me but its not a deal breaker. I would have been more than happy to pay an extra $100-$150 for my ps4 at launch for backwards compatibility with ps1, ps2, & ps3 or even just backwards compatibility with ps3 and digital ps1 & ps2.
 
Inuhanyou said:
Although its convenient and nice to have, its not a dealbreaker at all to my purchasing decision if other factors are at stake like higher price point and more efficient power consumption. If i want to play my old games so much, i'll keep my old consoles. And i do.

In the history of consoles, BC has only been in a few consoles ever really. So seeing it as a standard is really weird to me.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I have attempted to get more into PC gaming but I just cant right now. That is one of the biggest pros to PC gaming. I think I still have some game discs from the Win 98 days, some card games. I wouldnt be surprised if they still worked.

I thought I had full PS2 BC with the PS3, found out I bought the wrong model. It didnt even bother me. And I only played 1-2 orig Xbox games on my 360.

I am a completion fanatic, thats why I still have some old systems lying around. I have yet to finish FF X, MG Snake Eater, Scar Face...and GTA San Andreas....lol And that is just a small sample...
 
If the PS4 had it, I'd own a PS4 right now, probably. That's likely also true for the Xbox One.

I don't want clutter under my television. I don't want to swap out consoles, either. There's absolutely nothing wrong with older games -- I can play a PS2 game just as happily as playing something newer. More than that, I like replaying old games. I paid good money for them, I want to re-experience them at reasonable intervals. I treat my movie collection the same way; otherwise, why have it?

To be clear, it is the single most important feature. Without backwards compatibility, my interest in the new consoles is basically zero. I don't care about anything else they do. All the non-gaming applications are irrelevant to me, I just want to play games, and that includes all my existing ones.
 
Not even remotely important.

Convenient, yes, but not important.

If you own the games, you own the console. If you don't own the games, you have no need for backwards compatibility. If you want to play the older games, play them on the console they were made for.

Everyone loves the SNES, N64 and Dreamcast and none of them had backwards compatibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Xbox asks for backward compatibility suggestions
Opinion Retro Game Dev  2 3 4
193
766
RedC replied
[Windows Central]Rejoice! Microsoft's Xbox Backwards Compatibility Program is coming back this year — "we’re committed to keeping games from 4 gen."
35
719
Gonzito replied
  • Poll
How important is game preservation to You?
2
52
1K
seething left replied
[MLiD] PS6 Portable Leak - Yes, it has Backwards Compatibility. PS6 Performance, Exclusives, AI's Impact on Gaming.
News Rumor Hype 
41
667
Bojji replied
[WC] Microsoft and Xbox are "actively investigating" a rampant 'can't connect' issue for backwards compatible Xbox 360 games
2
58
566
Tobimacoss replied
Top Bottom