What would you use as your main console

[Dodece]

@Sky Render

I think your confusing accessibility with backward compatibility. The former is not a substitute for the latter unless the former is provided totally free of charge. Which in the case of both the virtual console or PSN is most assuredly not the case. Yes access to those networks is free however downloading a game you previously purchased at an additional fee is not a savings it is in fact an increase. Nobody wants to purchase something again they previously purchased.

The point of backwards compatibility is that you are able to insert the media from a previous iteration of a console into your new console, and you know actually be able to play that old title on your new console. Most gamers who are not blinded by a loyalty agree this is very important, because we all develop a strong fondness for many of our titles, and will gladly play them long into a new generation.

I am sorry you also do not seem to understand common architecture. The 360 shares much of its architecture with your standard desktop. More to the point its progeny will probably share the same characteristics. This is one of the reasons the console receives many more PC ports then its brethren. I am honestly not shocked by the design considering Microsoft's primary business is designing software for computers. For the foreseeable future I cannot imagine Microsoft designing a machine radically different from a standard PC board.

Which cannot be said for Sony. Who has went off on two tangents that are now at odds with one another. Thus the PS3 cannot provide emulation support for PS2 games, and if Sony decides to use something other then the Cell in their next console. Believe me it is very likely since Stringer himself is moving Sony out of processor manufacture. Then what you have is PS3 games that cannot play on a PS4 which cannot emulate the Cell, and still cannot passably emulate for the PS2 either.

Nintendo isn't much better on backward compatibility then Sony, because Nintendo has a hard on for hardware novelty. Are we to assume that the Wii mote will be the last incarnation of their controller given peripherals such as the board, the wheel, the zapper, and the plus. Nintendo dearly loves its peripherals, and I am finding it hard to believe that Nintendo will be supporting triple redundancy. I think it is more then likely they will kick the pad to curb. Not that Nintendo has ever been a strong advocate of backward compatibility. Given how they redesigned their carts every generation up until the game cube, and even then the format had to be proprietary.

For those who choose a primary platform it is solid economic advice to choose the console manufacturer that is most likely to do the better job with backwards compatibility. This is not a which console do you prefer question. I had a Gamecube, and I still would advocate a PS2 on these grounds. Why well Sony had good backward compatibility policies. That meant a larger library, longer support, and the games retained greater value. For the simple reason that they did not instantly depreciate the moment the next generation of console came out.

I am really looking at the day when the original poster is actually going to ditch their current generation of consoles. When that day comes if they want to retain their library or not its simple math if the manufacturer has a good backwards compatibility policy next generation the original poster will at the very least be able to recoup more of their investment. When you buy a game for sixty dollars it is better to be able to sell it to someone else for ten rather then two. When you spend three hundred of four hundred dollars on a console it is better to sell it for a hundred rather then forty.