By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
NJ5 said:
colonelstubbs said:
I find it constantly amazing how firstly, people take BC for granted.

Was the N64 backwards compatible?

Was the Gamecube?

Was the Dreamcast?

Secondly, i also love how people only talk about BC when its not there anymore. Were there threads on the PS2s release saying 'oh my god the best thing about it is the backwards compatibility!'

And thirdly, who buys a games console, to play the games for the previous console!? I bought my ps3 to play ps3 games. If id wanted to play ps2 games i would have just kept my ps2!

I'm happy that the 360 and Wii are backwards compatible, since it allows me to play some games I otherwise wouldn't be able to. I never owned a GC or Xbox. What's more, the 360 upscales Xbox games as the PS3 does to PS2 games AFAIK. Then there's the space and cable jungle issues. How many consoles can you connect to your TV without using switches and the like?

I don't understand why you would downplay BC like that. Clearly it's a desirable feature that many people would like to have.

 

It's desirable, but almost exclusively to people who already own a PS3. Almost nobody bought a PS3/360/Wii to play PS2/Xbox/GameCube games. It's not a feature that signficantly sells a console, especially not 3 years into a system's life. Furthermore, It's wholely unprofitable for Sony to keep PS2 backwards compatibility in PS3s. It made the system more expensive to produce when it was already too expensive to begin with and it significantly took away from PS2 hardware sales where Sony makes quite a lot of profit from.