| Slimebeast said: Your idea of FORWARD COMPATIBILITY is already implemented though, isn't it? U r able to run PS2 games in a higher resolution on the PS3, arent u?. |
As has been explained a couple of times already, that's an example of backwards compatibility. Forward compatibility would be playing the PS3 games on PS2.
@Angel_Dwk
Consoles are computers, just focused on certain functions. And I certainly can make the comparison between a computer upgrade and different generation consoles because the end result is exactly the same.
Yes, over time programs are written that can only be run on newer hardware. But oftentimes similar effects can be generated on older hardware. People can enjoy the games on their older hardware, and when they feel like it they'll upgrade for better graphics and eventually games that can only be played on the newer hardware.
I realize the developers eventually leave the last-gen and move to the current-gen, but ask yourself why the current-gen exists? For the most part every generation has merely been a leap in graphics.
If you could play every single PS3 game on PS2 or every 360 game on the xbox would you be happy with those PS2/Xbox graphics, or would you eventually upgrade anyway?
As long as FC wasn't forced onto the developers(meaning the console itself did all the work of "downconverting" the game), it's be a great bonus for them as well. They'd have both consoles' active install base as perspective buyers of new games. With FC it wouldn't require millions of people to upgrade to the new console to have good sales of a new game. It'd make sense for the console makers too as long as they don't follow a loss-leading strategy. They'll enjoy the royalties on all those sales regardless of the install base on their new system. And eventually people will want the new system for the upgraded grpahics and whatever other features are added.
@puffy
Also a great explanation. Really everyone would win. It would just depend on how it's implemented.
