Slashdot Mirror
Backward Compatibility in Next-Gen Consoles?
jvm writes "A new article at Curmudgeon Gamer speculates on the prospects for backward compatibility in the upcoming generation of video game consoles. Sony's PlayStation 3 will reportedly play both PSOne and PlayStation 2 games, but how it will achieve this is unknown. Building from the facts we know and the rumored specifications, can we look forward to replaying Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker on the GameCube 2 and Halo on the Xbox 2?"
Assuming previous reports are true, it's unlikely...
This news article in Japanese, dated 2003/07/15, report that SCEI announced recruitment of PlayStation emulator developers. (The official link at SCEI is http://www.scei.co.jp/synthesis/career/careerpro10 8.html, though it's already gone. Geez, I submit this story before in the last summer to Slashdot but rejected)
What is required for those who apply the recruitment was 1. Experience in emulator making 2. Knowledge about Just-In-Time compiler 3. Knowledge about CPU micro-architecture, and recommended is "experience in debugging existing game titles".
For PS2 compat in PS3, 1-chip EE/GS a la PS1 in PS2, for co-processor in PS3, or something hardware/software mix, will be safe bet.
At this point making consoles backwards compatible is a smart move for makers. Not only do you get to leverage your new exclusive games, but you also get to leverage your installed customer base.
When making any kind of puchase I look at everything from the cost of the new console to the cost of getting enough games for it that I do not get bored after a month. If the console choices do not support my old games I will look at other systems and compare them, if it does support my old games then the choice becomes more of an "upgrade" with minimal cost rather than a replacement with maximum cost.
In my personal opinion if the PS2 did not support the PS1 games then the XBox would have gained a greater share of the console market.
NarratorDan
"If you're not confused by quantum mechanics, you really don't understand it." - Niels Bohr
Can we get beyond Sony's horrible naming convention?
The Xbox and GameCube successors are most likely NOT going to include numbers and addressing them as such is just a stamp to your ignorance of memories past.
In other news, since the next MS console is switching processors, gfx chips, losing the hard drive and dropping off the black and white buttons, it probably will not play the old games.
I had a PSone. I have well over a thousand dollars worth of software for it. I played PS one games for about 10 minutes on my PS2. Yes, I occasionally get nostalgic for Mike Tyson's Punch out and drag out the NES, but after about 10 minutes I feel really stupid for digging that thing out of the closet and I start to dread having to put it back in.
There are software engineers out there working their asses off to give me bigger, better, faster, and more, and all I can say is: "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
When I am playing the "haggling with the hooker" mini-game on GTA 5, I will NOT be pining to play Vice City. When I am mowing down the Covenant with three out-of-state buddies in co-op mode, I will not feel the desire to pop in the original.
It's technology, it changes, bottom line- it'll still be fun. I once paid two thousand dollars for a 486 so I could play Ultima VII. When Exult came out I played it for about 10 minutes. Old games are just that, OLD.
How it will achieve this is unknown?
Possibly the same way they achieved it for the PS2. No aspect of the idea sounds difficult.
PS3 has been guaranteed to have backwards compatibility with PSOne and PS2 by Sony. They feel this is a major issue for customers. It is to me. I love knowing I'll always have a system to play my current PS games, possibly with graphical and load time advantages (as the current situation).
Microsoft isn't sure about backwards compatibility, since a lot of their games use proprietary nVidia technology, and since nVidia has wisely jumped that sinking ship. The main factor in the decision though being whatever Sony does with PS3. How embarrassing to be gripped so firmly by the testes.
Nintendo hasn't done it before (except with Gameboys) but I don't see a reason not to start for them. They do have a tendancy to change media with each console though.
Must we tread the same ground over and over again? Nintendo has already indicated more than once that their next machine will be backwards compatible with the GC. A quick Google turned up this.
Sony has also confirmed compatibilty with the PSX and PS2. The Register has the story here.
The only wildcard is Microsoft, who seem to be leaving some of the important hardware specs to the last minute in an effort to meet or beat Sony. It is very unlikely that the Xbox Next, or whatever they're are going to call it, will be backward compatible given the facts that the machine will lack a hard drive, has moved to a different microprocessor family (IBM), entirely new graphics chip from ATI, and a redesigned controller without the black and white buttons.
In my opinion, I find the lack of backwards compatibility very telling -- almost an admission from Microsoft that the current Xbox strategy is a failure. Quite a pity, I really do enjoy my Xbox and backwards compatibility would have cinched me as a customer of the next machine.
Ken Katsuragi (I think that's how you spell it), has previously stated in an interview that PS3 and ALL consoles following will be backwards compatible forever! For as long as Gran Turismo is released on Playstation, I'll for always be a Sony fan...
*604x
The nice thing about backwards compatibility is it makes your machine 'usable' if the launch titles suck, and generally they do. After that.. well who really mucks with it? I mean, I could see somebody who doesn't own a PS1 enjoying playing the $5 bargain bin games on the PS2. But really, both systems were so successful that it's hard to imagine the compatibility feature being that big of sell.
Nintendo got it right. Don't lock your system into a groove. I mean, really, what if the GameCube had held on to N64 games? Would it be a cartridge based machine as well, or would it be significantly bigger than it is today?
Frankly, I see backwards compatibility as a fad. At least with the PS2, the PS1 games had an option of 'improving' the graphics. But how is the PS3 going to do that? It's not going to invent higher resolution textures. It isn't going to have much spiffier polygon drawing capabilities other than sheer number of them. I doubt they can go back and add real-time shadows to the games. (That'd be neat if they did actually..) Meanwhile, the cost of the system goes up *or* the quality of the older games goes down.
Nintendo's approach is more interesting. Take the classic games, update them to what the new system can handle, and resell it. Yeah, you're out a few extra $$$, but you gain a more interesting game. Super Mario All Stars anyone?
Call me cynical, but I firmly believe that Sony's going to discover within a generation or two that backwards compatibilty ain't all that hot anymore. Now, if you can make a portable system that plays previous generation games, then you've got a gold mine brewing. Too bad Playstation(N) discs are 5" wide.
"Derp de derp."
Any time my friends talk that 'Soul Calibur 2' smack with those annoying GameCube controllers, I have go to the PS2 and pull out Bushido Blade. I'm sorry, there has never been a better fighting game that had weapons than Bushido Blade.
Sure, you may disagree. So may my friends. But the point is just that. Different peopl have different opinions. I love the fact that I can play old games. Sometimes I feel like playing them. Sue me.
Jeffool.
Do I think it's a useful thing? Sure, for some people. Is it necessary that they include it or else it'll kill their system's sales? Nope.
"Armed forces abroad are of little value unless there is prudent counsel at home" - Cicero
You forgot the shelving aspect.
Japanese homes are tiny. Really tiny. You wouldnt believe how tiny they are.
As such, near everything in Japan is designed to save space. The gamecube is incredibly tiny, while the ps2 can be mounted vertically, giving it an EXTREMELY small footprint. The xbox is a gargantuan monster.
Yes. This design aspect may seem trivial to Americans, who can throw a console in a closet and forget about it until they want to dig it out to play some oldschool games. But in japan, size is a MAJOR issue.
Think about how much space backwards compatability can save. I wouldnt say its the #1 selling point, but its worthwhile to note.
On another note, the xbox is not selling well in Japan at all. This is interesting because it has always been the most graphically impressive system that catches the Japanese gamer's eyes. They love their pretties. But, for some reason, xbox didnt sell. Could be the "its not japanese" aspect.
Of course, noone really points out that one of the major reasons that the ps2 sold well in japan was because of its dvd capabilities. DVDs had not taken off in japan at the time, and when the ps2 was released it was the most inexpensive DVD player.. and it played cds, ps1 games and ps2 games.. and everyone HAD a ton of ps1 games already.
I expect the next gen of consoles to be boring.
no
Final Fantasy IX, Valkyrie Profile, so on and so forth. All PS1 games, but released during the PS2 era. PS1-compatible games were released well into 2003 (could even be ones this year, but I don't know). In fact, at least a few games that are marketed as PS2 and carry the PS2 mark on the package have been found to be PS1 compatible.
Also, PS1 games still sell quite well. They can't get a PS1 console as cheap as you say they can, it's hard to find in the stores, and you can't play PS2 games with it.
Sony still makes money from PS1 game sales, but PS1 console sales are pretty much done with. SNES games continued being produced until 1999. Playstation games date back to, what, 1995? Thusly:
I challenge you to find a single SNES game from 1996 (pretty much the last year they were produced in the US) in a retail store (new, not used). While you're at it, go to the developers and try to order one. Can't do it, eh? Now, try to find a PS1 game from that year. Quite easy. You can probably buy thirty of them just by driving around a few retail stores.
Hell, the Target here in Saginaw has an entire isle still dedicated to PS1 games (more shelf space than for PS2), and this isn't a big town for game sales. They dedicate an enitre end-of-isle rack to GB/GBC games as well, and they sell.
The games are cheap to produce. The games that will turn a profit already have, so it's basically just covering the cost of production (what, 14 cents for the disk, maybe 50 for the case? Sell for a dollar and you make a profit, and they usually sell for $5 to $20).
IMO, there are four reasons to have a console with backwards compatibility:
1) People who DID NOT buy the previous console might be draw more toward the new version. The reason for this is obvious: they now have an 'excuse' to go back and get all the 5 star games that came out for the old console.
2) Your old console stopped working, and you didn't pay to fix it or buy another one.
3) The new version has the capability to play the old games 'better,' meaning faster or nicer graphics.
4) You don't have room for both the new and old consoles.
At this point, I think that #1 is the most important. Why? First of all, #2 is a fairly rare occurance. Sure, you hear about broken PS2s and Xboxes, but what is the ratio of failures to sold units AFTER considering the service plans that were used to repair said failures? I'll put my money on 'Very Low.'
#3 was implemented by the PS2, and of the games I've tried playing, the difference was negligable, if the game worked at all.
#4 is just sad. If you are hardcore enough to want to go back and play those old games that often, you'll make room. Or you'll pack it up, and pull it out to plug into those front RCA jacks on your TV when the need arises. I personally just trickle the old consoles down to the next smaller TV in the house. They're still available, and they're not in the way.
Having said all that, I do not own an Xbox, but on several occasions have been on the verge of buying one (standing there at the counter in EB, asking how much they go for, CC in hand). If the NeXtbox were to be backwards compatible, and reasonably priced, I'd buy one as soon as I could get my grimey paws on one.
I have an original PS, a PS2, a DC, an N64, and a GameCube. If PS3 and GameCube v2 were backwards compatible, I could care less. Why? I can already play the old games. If anything, the new consoles would get packed up after playing through the initial (most likely crap) libraries, until something reasonably good were to be released!
All Your Memory Are Belong To Java
"[The next-generation Nintendo console] will be able to use the games already created in the previous generation." - Satoru Iwata, Dec. 2003 Famitsu interview
I've only tried to play 1 PS game on my PS2 - XCom ... and it didn't support the PS2 save cards.
So if it was flawless, I'd probably be hyped about it, but I don't entirely trust it anymore.
Nintendo have already released the "REAL Legend of Zelda for NES" for the Gamecube. It was on the second of two Zelda-related bonus discs Nintendo released last year. The first you got with preorders for Wind Waker, and included an emulated Ocarina of Time and OOT: Master Quest. The second you got for buying two new Nintendo approved games last year and sending in the registration cards, and included emulated versions of The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II, Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask.
I'd love to see a similar Mario disc but keep in mind that the SNES/NES Mario ports were bestsellers last year on GBA.
Here are a few more reasons I thought of...
It is nice is that you can sell your old console to someone who can't afford the $ for the new console that has backward compatibility. Also helps you offset the cost of the new console.
Another reason could be higher video quality. For example, the PS2 can be hooked up using component cables making for a sharper/clearer image on my projector. You can not hook up the PS1 via those same cables.
Next gen consoles may improve the video quality. The PS2 has options the smooth the textures of the PS1 for example.
Next gen consoles may load old games faster as is the case of the PS2 vs PS1.
Your old accessories might already work for the next gen console so you don't have to buy new ones. For example the PS1 controllers work on the PS2. They lack the pressure sensitive buttons, but most games don't use those anyway.
I wouldn't call #4 sad. I play a lot of ps1 and ps2 games and I for one am glad to only have one machine. Sure I'd find a way to get them both hooked up if I had to, I'm just happy I don't have to. 11 components hooked to my tv is plenty. If you're someone who doesn't play the old games, then it wouldn't matter, but I tend to play a lot of them.
was becouse of the backwards compatibly. Atleast the few non gamers in know chose a ps2 over a xbox becouse of the sheer volume of old cheap ps1 games that would work on there new ps2.
Let's think about it this way. What systems are currently the most popular and have the largest user base? The Gameboy/Gameboy Advance and the Playstation/Playstation 2. Is it a coincidence? It could be. But a fact that I'm sure every game console manufacturer has noticed. More than likely, I see at least 2 out of the 3 next generation consoles implementing backwards compatibility. For Sony, it just makes sense. They've done it before, seen the benefit, and will do it again. Nintendo has also seen in their GBA. I'm sure they've learned their lesson and will port it to the home console. Then there is Microsoft. I heard rumours but nothing substantial. With the change of their chip, it may prove too costly to add that feature. Yet, in the long run, I believe it would be beneficial for them to include it. But in the end, I've seen manufacturers make some crazy decisions before (Virtual Boy, CDi, etc.) so I wouldn't make any conclusions until the announcements have been made.
From what I've heard here and elsewhere, between the internal hardware changes, and dropping two (important!!) buttons from the controller I don't see how the XBox2 could possibly be backwards compatible.
I think this is total folly on Microsoft's part, especially considering that despite better graphics they are still way below being the console market leader, so we've already seen that better graphics != bigger marketshare. When a new system comes out, what I ask myself is - ok, so what does this system give me that my current one doesn't and how much is it gonna cost me? Experience tells us the MSRP on this new X2 is gonna be at least $250, and by the time it comes out original XBoxes will be selling for $150 or less. The XBox is still a kick-ass system, and provided a major leap from N64 and PS1 (and personally I feel PS2 as well). So what could the X2 possibly be offering to encourage consumers to buy a new console and a whole new suite of games to play on it? Just getting the system and enough games to enjoy it will cost probably somewhere in the neighborhood of $500+. Unless the X2 gives 3D (as in holographic) graphics, or is just so liquid that the real-time graphics look like the ray-traced FMVs from recent Final Fantasies then there's no reason to upgrade to the new system. Hell it makes more sense to go out and buy a used xbox and half a dozen used games and you'll still spend less than upgrading and still have a great console.
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
The PS2 can supposedly run MOST ps1 games but, it's not perfect, and I'm guessing that with the cell architecture, that might not get any better. What we need are ADD ONS! remember the sega 32x and mega drives that went into the existing cartridge slots? We could have giant cylinders that go into CD slots! Then we could watch them spin and shoot lasers! by the time it's done spinning, we'll be soo blind we wont even want to play video games anymore! Oh yeah... and make the cd drives open like a ps1 instead of a slot might help
Japanese people seem to be perfectly willing to buy American products (look at all of those American brands over there) they just don't like the Xbox.
I just don't see BW compatibility as being all "that". I've worked in videogame retail for nearly 6 years, so I've had the luck to be in on most of the recent big launches, and I also was around for the end of some of the stinkers (Saturn, anyone?).
;-) Seriously, time and time again they were far more impressed with the graphical leap they saw than they were in the software compatibility. Once we got done giving the customer the usual rundown on the memory card incompatibility and the analog-button PS1 incompatibility, most of the guests concluded they were buying a 60% standalone unit and were happy with that.
Admittedly I am in a middle-sized town in Florida (Lakeland), but we get a fair share of business, so I've seen and spoken to many a gamer over those 6 years. When PS2 launched, very few people were interested in the fact that it could play PS1 games. The closest consideration I repeatedly saw was that some parents were buying one because that way they could put their old PS1 in the kid's room to get the kids out of their hair.
Even now, with all 3 consoles firmly on their last sprints, BWC just isn't the buzz for selling a PS2 over an XBox or GC. In fact, 80% of the time in my store it isn't a factor. At this stage, it is game selection almost all the time. It is either generalized software selection (lack of online EA sports games on XBox, lack of Mario on PS2, lack of "M" games on GC) or niche accessories (EyeToy is selling a number of PS2s in our store, believe it or not...a $49.99 accessory triggering a $179.99 console sale...the XBox Live system triggering XBox sales...GBA connectivity selling GCs).
I also don't think the PS2 BWC was the defining reason for the PS2's profound success in the market, either. Consider that the PS2 had a nice marketplace leadtime over the other two, giving it time to build a console library. Not only that, but each of the XBox and GC has been crippled to some degree by various issues. To whit, the XBox "fails" for the following reasons: Overabundance of "M"/"T" based on desired audience market (lack of "E"/Disney/etc), sterile launch selection (many sports, fighting games, little platforming), unknown market "grasp" (new contender). The GC "fails" for the following reasons: Overabundance of "E"/Disney/etc (too many games are "cutesy" to teenage/adult gamers), baffling lack of any online gaming titles (other than Phantasy Star Online series), lack of BWC in GC.
Now, note if you've read carefully that I indicate a lack of BWC as a failure of the GC. That wasn't a mistype. I believe that BWC does not necessarily increase sales of a console, but in some ways, not having BWC will decrease sales of a console. The two aren't the same thing. Clearly the attractive price of the GC this last holiday season helped Nintendo unload a ton of GCs, regardless of their lack of BWC. Yet, in the early weeks of the GC launch, I can't tell you how many people boycotted the GC out of principle because it wouldn't support the N64. For some reason, I heard many vehement complaints about that lack of BWC. I think people were still smarting over the $49.99 or higher prices of N64 cartridges (rather than the $39.99 or less PS1 cds), and then to not be able to use them was insult to injury. People weren't buying PS2 in my store because they could play PS1, they were not buying GCs because they couldn't play N64. Go figure.
As for this next round, people are more jaded now. They fully expect no compatibility, unless it's by Sony. Anything else will be a bonus. This next round, to my opinion, will easily have PS3/PS2 BWC, possible GC2/GC BWC, and there's still a chance for XB2/XB BWC. (I still see a chance because: Black/white button could be emulated somehow [they aren't used all that often], hard drive memory saves could be handled by some form of high capacity 512mb or gb+ flash memory cards [using internal XB2 APIs to redirect old software hard drive calls to the new medi
Londovir
Software Emulation Microsoft and Nintendo could do it if they wanted to.
Backwards compatability is imo one of the biggest reasons for the PS2's success.
With limited spazce available in most homes, no-one wants to have to throw away/sell all their old favourite games jsut because they have bought a better console that cannoyt play them.
It was a stroke of genius for Sony to add this feature so as not to alienate all their loyal customers.
I have no sig yet I must scream.
I've heard that Nintendo have said their new one will be backwards compatible, but given that they never do this simply because in Japan they don't actually stop selling the previous model (they only recently stopped making the Famicom!) I can't really see it happening.
The price is set to drop soon. Then the price of the used unit will drop also. You can get a used 1.1 unit (easiest to mod) easier than a new one, just visit your local used game joint regularly and check the serial numbers (print out the ID guide...) since the Xbox warranty is good for three months or something, it's useless. Better to buy used, or reconditioned. Actually, a reconditioned unit is probably the best way to go.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"