How important is backwards compatibility to you?

How important is backwards compatibility to you?

  • Very important - Will not buy a new console unless it can play my old games

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • Somewhat important - It's nice to have, but it's not required

    Votes: 18 90.0%

  • Not important - I'll just use my old consoles to play my old games

    Votes: 1 5.0%
  • Total voters
    20
Dell Conagher

Dell Conagher

The engineer is engihere
Title

Personally, I fall under the second choice.

Edit: Meant to type "It's nice to have" in the second option.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's not like the deciding factor in what consoles I buy, but it's still awful nice to have
 
My Wii served as my backup GameCube for years since my original one got busted but nowadays, backwards compatibility is not something I desperately need.
 
Just realized I made a typo. Meant to say "It's nice to have", not "It's not to have". And I can't edit poll options for whatever reason. Hopefully it didn't cause any confusion.
 
Whittle said:
Just realized I made a typo. Meant to say "It's nice to have", not "It's not to have". And I can't edit poll options for whatever reason. Hopefully it didn't cause any confusion.
Click to expand...

happened to see this so I fixed it for you!

since I'm here, second option - I do nowadays tend to prefer playing on the newest consoles, but I keep everything so. definitely not a dealbreaker or anything, just nice to have
 
I don't think it decides my purchase but it does give me a lot more confidence that the media will be preserved into the future. In that regard, I guess I'm more concerned about delistings and online-restricted services that might be taken down later, and I do sometimes avoid those in extreme cases so that I don't get attached to something ephemeral.
 
I think backwards compatibility is great, as the Wii's b.c. with the GC, the Wii U's b.c. with the Wii, and 3DS's b.c. with the DS were all huge lifesavers for me. Since I have a Switch, it isn't 100% necessary to me for the next console to be b.c. with the Switch, but it'd still be a big plus for anyone who never had one so I hope for it.
 
I wonder was there ever a console that was backwards compatible with the SNES? I don't think so, but....also was the SNES backwards compatible with the NES?
 
Larry Koopa said:
I wonder was there ever a console that was backwards compatible with the SNES? I don't think so, but....also was the SNES backwards compatible with the NES?
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware, the only home consoles with backwards compatibility are the Wii (plays Gamecube) and Wii U (plays Wii). For handhelds, there's the Game Boy Advance (plays Game Boy/Color), DS (plays Game Boy Advance), and 3DS (plays DS).
 
Larry Koopa said:
I wonder was there ever a console that was backwards compatible with the SNES? I don't think so, but....also was the SNES backwards compatible with the NES?
Click to expand...

The SNES never had backwards compatibility with the NES almost certainly due to technical restraints. However, the idea of playing the same game on different consoles was always around. In the era when the NES, SNES, and Game Boy were all relevant, it was not uncommon for the same game to be made for at least two of the consoles. Yoshi's Cookie, Wario's Woods, and Tetris all come to mind as examples. And these weren't simply ports either - they usually had many differences between them.

Anyway, for the thread question, no backwards compatibility isn't a deal breaker to me. It is nice to have though.
 
I think backwards compatibility is more important if the console is a "sequel console" that is a continuation and straightforward upgrade of the design ethos/infrastructure of the previous console. If the console is more focused on providing a different type of experience or the jump in technology is big enough then backwards compatibility becomes less important.
 
khaoticnoize187 said:
Super important honestly thats why the vita flopped-ish cause of the lack of therof backwards compatibiltiy.
Click to expand...
no the vita flopped because no one wanted it. it just was not hardware that was of interest the vast majority of consumers, simple as that. (well that + sony not really giving a shit about the console after its first year on the market, non-japanese and non-indie third parties abandoning it early on as well, it didn't really have a proper killer app [obviously the system had great games, but when one of the most praised games for the system was a ps2 port that's kind of like...wow], etc.)

also the vita did have backwards compatibility. obviously it wasn't compatible with UMDs due to the completely different format, but PSP games that were released digitally were (and still are, since the vita store is still online) compatible with the vita
 
Princess Viola said:
no the vita flopped because no one wanted it. it just was not hardware that was of interest the vast majority of consumers, simple as that. (well that + sony not really giving a shit about the console after its first year on the market, non-japanese and non-indie third parties abandoning it early on as well, it didn't really have a proper killer app [obviously the system had great games, but when one of the most praised games for the system was a ps2 port that's kind of like...wow], etc.)

also the vita did have backwards compatibility. obviously it wasn't compatible with UMDs due to the completely different format, but PSP games that were released digitally were (and still are, since the vita store is still online) compatible with the vita
Click to expand...
>No one wanted it

I iunno bout you, but theres lot of weebs including myself who love the vita cause of the niche games that are on there.

And i was refferring to physical media i mean technically lot of consoles do but i'm a stickler to physical media.
 
Vita flopped for a lot of reasons.

And to be frank I feel like the only reason the PSP had any real success was due to how easy it was to mod. Piracy was rampant on that thing.
 
A little surprised to see no one's voted for the first option so far. I've seen some people on GameFAQs and other sites say they won't buy the Switch 2 unless is plays Switch 1 games.
 
The real dealbreaker for me is forwards compatibility, I won't buy a console unless it has it.
Still waiting to buy my first console
 
KingBowser64 said:
The real dealbreaker for me is forwards compatibility, I won't buy a console unless it has it.
Still waiting to buy my first console
Click to expand...
Is forwards compatibility a real term? If so, what does it mean? Unless you're joking. I half suspect you made that term up.
 
Well I guess it has been used sparingly as an actual feature on consoles. It means that one console can play the next generation's games. For instance, the original Game Boy could play certain Game Boy Color games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back