With the new generation of consoles fast approaching, the question of backwards compatibility has once again come to the forefront of the gaming conversation. Sony and Microsoft have both confirmed that their new machines will be capable of playing current generation games. This is a marked difference from the launch of PS4 and Xbox One in 2013, when neither new system could play games created for their predecessors. It would seem that backwards compatibility has been included by popular demand this time around. Why though, are we as fans of the medium so transfixed by the past? Why are console manufacturers so reluctant to indulge this desire?  To answer these questions I’ll present some of the arguments for and against backwards compatibility from both a consumer and manufacturer’s point of view 

 

For backwards Compatibility

 

Preservation 

It could be said that if games are to cement themselves as a medium for artistic expression, we must make every effort to preserve history in the industry’s fledgling stages. The games industry is not even 50 years old. But try to go back and explore the works of its early years and you’ll soon see the unique problems the very nature of the medium poses for preservation. Most of the time, it’s not enough to preserve a hard copy of a game, or even its source code. Depending on the nature of its platform, the original hardware must be preserved as well. Want to play an obscure arcade game from 1986? Odds are you’re out of luck without the original hardware in working order. Preservation could be important in a historical context, chronicling the evolution of game mechanics and game-making techniques over time. We stand at a crossroads where an industry-wide commitment to backwards compatibility could make historical preservation of games easier. The games industry could, in future, have a more complete recorded history than any other artistic medium, but only if we act now. 

 

In this age of patches, updates, and a trend toward an all-digital future, backwards compatibility could be essential in ensuring access to the original form of a game. Drawing on a comparison to the film industry, many Star Wars fans today lament the fact that the original 1977 film’s theatrical cut is not available in any modern format. Without a VCR and a rare copy of the theatrical cut’s final release, it is simply not possible to watch the film in its original form. Fans and film historians instead must watch heavily modified editions of the film. Similarly, Final Fantasy VII has had many re-releases over the years, all of them modified slightly. No version of the game is perfectly identical to the original release on PlayStation 1. If the PS4 was backwards compatible with all previous generations, access to the original, unaltered version of the game would be much easier.

 

Remaster Culture 

No recent trend in games irritates me more than the slew of remasters and remakes in the last five years. Granted, remastered, remade and re-released games are not a new idea. This generation however, has seen players pay exorbitant prices for ports of previous-generation games. Call of duty 4: Modern Warfare, The Bioshock Collection, and Skyrim are just a few examples. Backwards compatibility would have obviated the need for these re-releases and saved consumers some amount of money. 

 

One could argue the case for high-quality total remakes such as Resident Evil 2 and the upcoming Final Fantasy VII Remake, which could better fit the “re-imagining” label. Indeed the Resident Evil 2 remake was one of the most acclaimed games of 2019. However, there’s no way around the fact that these titles are re-treading old ideas. Tetsuya Nomura is one of my favourite game directors, and has been hard at work on Final Fantasy VII Remake for the last four years. As much as I’m looking forward to playing the game, I would much rather have seen what new and original ideas he could have come up with in that time. Instead he’s been toiling away to modernize a story from 20 years ago. Perhaps backwards compatibility could have reduced the market for an overhaul of Final Fantasy VII even if by a paltry amount. 

 

 

Against

 

Hardware limitations 

 

Now let’s imagine a world where backwards compatibility is the norm. Every new console must be backwards compatible with all prior versions of that product. This could be reasonable for a company like Sony, whose line of home consoles have always used optical media and fairly standard controllers, but for the likes of Nintendo, this creates a problem. How would we arrive at an innovative console like the Switch if it needed a way to play GameCube discs and NES cartridges? How would you ensure Switch compatibility with the Wii without packing in a sensor bar and Wii remotes? Nintendo could employ a digital verification system like with Microsoft’s Xbox One backwards compatibility, but Nintendo’s unique hardware differences between generations could make this clunky and expensive for both the consumer and the manufacturer. Without backwards compatibility to fret over, hardware manufacturers are more free to innovate with their machines.

 

Facilitating backwards compatibility isn’t free. Manufacturers would need to have a division of engineers and QA teams dedicated to ensuring that older games run on newer hardware. In some cases, the cost of the hardware itself can skyrocket if it is to be backwards compatible. In the case of Sony’s PS3, the console cost a staggering $600 to purchase at launch due to the inclusion of additional hardware to facilitate backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2 and cost the company $900 to produce. This price tag crippled early sales of the unit and it wasn’t until the feature was dropped and the price reduced that sales began to incline. It seems lessons were learned from Sony’s failure in the PS3 generation. The PS4 and Xbox One generation saw a shift toward more PC-like hardware that will make backwards compatibility as far as the current generation near effortless in the future. It is for this reason that PS5 and the next generation Xbox will be compatible with their predecessors. Going back any further incurs hardware costs and the cost/benefit curve for manufacturers swings against backwards compatibility. 

 

Conclusion 

 

Ultimately, backwards compatibility is a feature that lots of consumers want, but that only a small fraction of the market will actually use. A handful of players buy a brand new machine for the ‘backwards compatible’ label on the box. Most consumers buy a new console to play the latest games. The games industry is just that, an industry, and in designing the next generation of consoles, platform holders will forever be bound not to what benefits the consumer, or historical preservation, but to what makes sense in business terms.