How the Industry Is Ruining Backwards Compatibility

Backwards compatibility seems like a rather archaic term these days. It’s a concept that shines brightly with exciting potential of expanding libraries and taking the tedium out of hooking up a retro system just to play a classic game from your childhood. But it’s an idea that’s become a significant afterthought that, aside from a few exceptions, hasn’t been worth including into modern gaming consoles…at least in the way we know it. Backwards compatibility is still being experimented with, as older games still have value on the market, but unlike at the beginning of the seventh generation, we’re not seeing an abandonment of backwards compatibility: we’re seeing a ruination of it.


Backwards compatibility used to be something of great merit. While consoles did have the potential to play games from their predecessors as far back as the Atari systems, the gaming industry had a rather scattered view of the concept. While it certainly presented convenience, it wasn’t something that many companies were willing to invest money toward, with the required tech being rather pricey. The Atari 5200 was among the first backwards compatible systems, but required a special adapter to be able to play Atari 2600 games. Similarly, the Sega Genesis used the Power Base Converter, which could be used to play Sega Master System games. Nintendo, despite being a poster-child for backwards compatibility in their systems, didn’t offer the feature in their systems until the Game Boy Color, which allowed for both Game Boy and Game Boy Color cartridges to be played. Similarly, the Super Game Boy for Super Nintendo allowed for Game Boy game access (though it wasn’t necessarily backwards-compatible, due to the systems’ coinciding activity). Backwards compatibility would become a rather common feature during the age of the sixth generation. Sony’s Playstation 2 offered the convenience of PS1 compatibility, while Nintendo continued to include backwards compatibility for their handhelds like the Game Boy Advance and Nintendo DS.

But the seventh generation began the industry’s hesitance to include backwards compatibility into their consoles. Microsoft’s Xbox 360 had early, but short-lived support for Xbox game emulation in a potentially buggy method that also didn’t work for the entire library of Xbox games. Sony debuted two different models of their Playstation 3 system, with only one of them providing full PS1 and PS2 backwards compatibility (obviously the more expensive one). The model was eventually discontinued in favor of the Slim model, which had no backwards compatibility, but had a much lower price. Nintendo, on the other hand, kept backwards compatibility for the Wii for a shockingly long time. Gamecube games, controllers, and memory cards were all functional with the original Wii model, a perfect fit for long-time fans of Super Smash Brothers who used Gamecube controllers. The Wii would eventually drop the backwards compatibility feature with a special bundle with New Super Mario Bros. Wii and the limited Wii Mini system. Nowadays, only the Wii U openly shares hardware-based backwards compatibility among consoles, offering functionality with Wii discs and controllers.


In fairness, backwards compatibility is an expensive feature. Designing new hardware to function with the older tech of the systems’ predecessors isn’t something that’s easy to do while still earning a considerable profit. The PS3 might have lost backwards compatibility with the Slim, but the lower price point contributed to the system’s rise in sales. During the 360’s lifespan, Microsoft claimed that people buy new consoles to play new games, not old, and while that is definitely correct, the convenience of being able to keep playing older games without digging out the RCA cables and fiddling with the TV connections is a great concept. There’s a sense of centralization with a backwards compatible system, one where you can play both old and new games without making any changes in connectivity.

But the convenience isn’t the big issue with the lack of hardware-based backwards compatibility. The problem is the idea’s replacement: software-based backwards compatibility, specifically the digital redistribution and sales of older games. We live in a gaming world where HD remakes and re-releases are constantly being released. With no way to play the discs themselves through the system, console makers are simply offering the games up on their digital storefronts…for re-purchase. Most of these games are just the original game with high-definition graphics and no additional content, meaning that you are literally buying the same game you already own, but with prettier graphics. Many games re-released in the seventh generation like those on God of War Collection had very little new content, simply updating the graphics marginally. As someone who already owned the first two God of War games, I couldn’t see any legitimate reason to re-buy these games, and with no compatibility to play these PS2 games on my PS3, I would be forced to re-buy these games. This implementation is technically a form of backwards compatibility, but the concept erases one of the best advantages of hardware-based backwards compatibility: being able to use and play your already owned games again, even if it’s on a different disc or format.

wind waker hd

Now, there have been some finer examples of this practice, but they all find ways to improve the game beyond just the graphics. The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker HD included a Hero Mode, better and more advantageous items like the Swift Sail, and community features on Miiverse in addition to an HD polish. The regular price tag is much more justifiable considering what additional content you’re getting. The ICO/Shadow of the Colossus HD collection had heavily improved technical performance, Playstation Network functionality, and even a budget price. These are games that improve upon the original games intelligently and with a stronger emphasis on value, so rebuying them doesn’t seem like a rip-off.

But with streaming services like Playstation Now on the way, backwards compatibility is becoming much harder to figure out. Sony aims to make PS Now a way to bring backwards compatibility back to the Playstation crowd, and while the selection is promised to be massive, the pricing is likely what will determine whether or not this really is the next step for backwards compatibility. Unless the versions streamed are legitimate improvements over the original games, even a slightly high fee will seem devious. Backwards compatibility has always, always been about two core fundamentals: convenience of access and reasonability of pricing. PS Now nails the first part no question, but it’s the second part that brings the skepticism out. The flood of HD remakes has already made many gamers nervous, as having to buy games at retail price again with barely any gameplay improvements is terrible, and while I doubt PS Now will go that far down the road to ripping consumers off, I can’t help but feel nervousness in the looming idea of having to buy The Last of Us again at a high price, just so I don’t have to hook up my PS3 again.


Backwards compatibility evolved from a masterfully thrifty convenience into a murky miasma of purchase anxiety. Being able to play your Game Boy Color games on your Game Boy Advance or your PS1 games on your PS2 was awesome, breaking down many of the restrictions that new console generations created. Nowadays, however, backwards compatibility isn’t so much a convenience, but a selling point, a way to further purchases even beyond the games’ respective generations. Yes, it’s expensive, and as Microsoft said, it’s not the reason that people buy next-gen consoles, but its implementation nowadays feels devious and manipulative. I would actually be content with no backwards compatibility at all over a form of backwards compatibility that wants me to buy the same game again, but in a marginally better-looking form. It’s optional, but the philosophy of using perfectly respectable games and charging so much for the exact same game (graphics aside) isn’t appealing; it’s distressing.

Will we ever have the same level of freedom we received with our Game Boy Advances or launch PS3s? Probably not. We’re already immersed in a market that loves capitalizing on our own convenience. I don’t expect that to go away anytime soon.

  • Jbumi

    I remember when the PS2 first came out. A woman & her son were in line in front of me at the store. They were discussing purchasing the PS2. Her concern was that all his PS1 games would be rendered useless. He told her that the PS2 was backwards compatible, but she was skeptical. I told her that he was correct, & she bought it for him. Fool that I was, I thought Sony would always continue the bc trend!

    Speaking of which, I thought all PS3s will play PS1 games. Does the final PS3 iteration (the one with the sliding disc top) not play them?

    • Daniel Masterson

      No I have the latest Slim PS3 and it still plays PS1 games just fine!. I have been playing Suikoden II and Xenogears on it lately.

      • Jbumi

        Thanks for the info! Suikoden II – I’m jealous! 🙂 Still waiting for it to show up on PSN.

        • Daniel Masterson

          Ya I have never played it before and recently got it. So far I am blown away. I definitely miss the PS1 era.

  • Robert Kupper

    Okay, I am not a fan of the HD remakes, but I think you have a lot of facts wrong here.

    Firstly, software emulation does not mean buying new copies, it is just a different kind of emulation. For example, launch PS3s have hardware that allows them to play PS2 games while the later 80gb models have software that merely interprets the information on the disk and allows it to run on the new hardware. Software emulation requires no new tech in the box, but is hard to make work, and has huge performance hits.

    The 8th gen systems cannot have hardware emulation. The PS3’s hardware is so different and so particular that they would basically be including most of a PS3 in the box. This is extremely expensive and would inflate the physical size of the unit greatly. The 360 is less strange but still a powerPC architecture and the hardware is not sufficiently small or cool to include. The new units are AMD64 architecture and are frankly not powerful enough to run software emulation of the old games. This isn’t an excuse, there are mathematical limits on emulation; especially since there isn’t much acceptable performance loss for video games. The developers of these systems decided to switch to a more traditional set-up on modern systems, and this should help future systems be compatible (As well as making them much easier to develop on) The Xbone should be able to emulate an original Xbox though I imagine.

    So, why can the WiiU play Wii games? Well the answer is pretty easy, the WiiU is essentially a more powerful Wii in terms of hardware, which was in turn very much like the Gamecube. There are small differences, but they all use PowerPC IBM processors. Slight adjustments need to be made for software differences, but it is trivial compared to other systems.

    So, while I am against re-buying games (Well, FFX remake was worth it to me) there is no real way to implement backwards compatibility this generation. I am not really a fan of Playstation Now either, I’ll just keep my PS3 connected. I like to physically own my games.

    • Trempest

      The article doesn’t say anything about software-based EMULATION. Just using the game itself as a form of backwards compatibility instead of the disc, like buying it digitally. You get the older game on your newer system, but the disc itself isn’t used. Emulation and backwards compatibility are not interchangeable.

      Also, yeah, the 8th gen systems can’t have hardware-based emulation without including a huge amount of the PS3 or 360’s guts, and like the article says, it’s expensive, but just because it’s expensive to accomplish doesn’t mean backwards compatibility doesn’t have any worth. I love it. It’s one reason why I kept my DS Lite instead of upgrading to a DSi.

  • it is quite silly with backwards compatibility.
    It just gives people excuse to make their old games playable whereas they won’t even have time playing the old games.

    Really, would you really want to play 6th gen games on a 9th gen consoles?
    You wouldn’t have time because when a new game comes out that supports multiplayer, if you don’t get involved in the multiplayer, within 6+ months the multiplayer population would start to die down.

    So many games coming out all the time, and you are telling me you still want to play old games on new consoles?
    It’s all lies. It is to do with love of materials, people just want to own something and don’t want to consider it useless.

    • Nathan

      You seem to be under the impression that everyone thinks alike. I can tell you that you are wrong. Not everyone is scrambling to buy the latest thing out, some people don’t give a flying monkey turd about online gaming and some people most definitely do play their old games.


      Yes, I would like to keep playing my old games, especially those from the sixth generation. Some of the best games came from that era. It’s not your place to assume that others will not have the time to play older games due to new releases. In fact, many of the newest games are severely lacking in comparison to the innumerable games of the past. Gamers will play what they want when they want. This means that they have the option of playing the “best” rather than the “newest.” Backwards compatibility serves to aid in this task. Just because you have a short attention span and do not value games as artistic works doesn’t meant that others share your ignorance.

  • Mike

    Sadly, the threat of paying full price for an old game is very real. See the PS4 Last Of Us’ price point when it is released next week.

  • Guest

    I’m definitely not rebuying old games like $0N¥ wants everybody to do. Only idiots fall for that and paying for a sub to replay my old games is a NO!

  • Nathan

    There is a lot getting in the way of backwards compatibility nowadays. Also, recent efforts have had problems.

    I believe I had the 60 gig launch model PS3 with backward compatibility. One game wouldn’t detect my force feedback wheel at all, another crashed every few minutes and in Gran Turismo 4, when I watched the demo of one of the license tests, the car drove off the track and started bumping into stuff. I could see the indicators for the amount of throttle and steering operating normally which makes me suspect it wasn’t calculating the physics correctly. Some games would play OK for a while and then the graphics would become corrupt and it would look like a rainbow vomited into a blender and painted my screen with the resulting pulp.

    I don’t have a problem with the remasters of games (I bought TLOU remastered). If you want to pay for a prettier version you can, if you don’t then don’t. What does bug me is stuff like the PS2 classics etc. I live in a PAL region and have therefore received lazy PAL conversions for most of my life (Fun fact: The PS3/XBOX360 generation was the first where PAL gamers got the same product as America and Japan. Although a lot of PS2 era games got PAL optimisation, a lot didn’t. PS1 era was even worse for it and in the 16-bit era pretty much all games ran around 20% slower than their NTSC counterparts as instead of accounting for the difference in refresh rate they simply clocked the system slower to match the 50hz refresh rate. The aspect ratio was incorrect for unoptimised games as instead of utilising the additional scanlines of PAL TVs, they simply squashed the images vertically). I think I’m correct in saying that when you buy PS2 games on the Playstation Store (also as I understand it Nintendo do the same) we are still getting the inferior PAL versions (thanks Sony and Nintendo!).

    The best solutions are a) well done software emulation (which as has been mentioned, when you are talking about emulating something like a PS3 just isn’t possible with today’s tech), plus if the game itself is in the form of a download you’ll have to buy it again. b) Hardware. To integrate into new consoles is expensive, thus console manufacturers will likely not want to do it, as we have seen with PS4/XB1.

    I have not mentioned cloud gaming as I am a bit resistant to it. Not everyone has access to a reliable internet connection and again, that big old stack of games you’ve accumulated will again mean nothing and you’ll have to shell out again (and seeing how they need money to maintain the servers and expand the service, you’ll likely be paying a premium. Also what happens if they decide to stop hosting the game you’ve paid for? No thanks).

    When it comes to playing older games, software emulation when computationally viable (like it is on PC pretty much up to 16-bit near perfectly, after that things get patchy). Other than that it has to be hardware.

    In my dream world you’d be able to buy a PC with a mix of new hardware to comply with modern displays and deal with scaling etc. This would have bays where you could put retro hardware modules so that you could play Windows 95/98/XP/Vista games without compatibility issues, all patched up to the last service pack and software version before support was ceased. In this perfect world you’d be able to buy reissues of consoles, again with a mix of modern and retro hardware as well as reissued cartridges and discs. Also, in this magical world you’d be able to reap the benefit of advancements made alongside the things we love from the past. Imagine it. An Amiga joystick that doesn’t break after three weeks, or an N64 controller with an analogue stick that doesn’t suck!

    A man can dream, a man can dream.