@mpl911: You used the word 'free' an awful lot there. It's free to the consumer, yes, but it's not free (or simple) for Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo to implement it. It does take work and resources to make those old games run on different machines. It's time and resources that can be spent elsewhere.
I'll repeat again that I think backwards compatibility is a nice feature. However, I totally understand why it doesn't make sense for companies to even bother with it.
Years ago, Microsoft said only 5% of gamers used it. Now that they've backpedaled and implemented backwards compatibility, they're spinning it to say nearly half of all X1 gamers have used it, based on the number of people who have loaded up a 360 game. Recent surveys, though, show that regardless of how many players have tested the feature, less than 2% of time on the system is spent playing old games. Netflix, YouTube, and other non-gaming applications are used significantly more than backwards compatibility.
@dlCHIEF58: That's why I also included the words 'rare' and 'relatively'. You can name a couple cases, but the vast majority of consoles before PS2 didn't have it. None of Nintendo's consoles had it before the Wii. The Sega Saturn didn't play Genesis or Sega CD games, the Dreamcast didn't play Saturn games, etc. It was rare, and no one felt like they were entitled to it.
I already said handhelds have done it, so I don't know why you brought up the Game Boy.
Odd how you assume my age. I grew up playing the Atari 2600 and Commodore 64, and I remember the day my family brought home the brand new Nintendo Entertainment System. Considering how long I've been gaming, yes, this backwards compatibility argument is relatively new. Because I still think of the PS2 as relatively new. Sure, it was released 17 years ago, but the Atari 2600 was released 40 years ago. In 40 years, very few consoles are backwards compatible. Even fewer go back more than a single generation.
Like I said, it's a nice feature, but considering how many systems I've owned that aren't backwards compatible, it seems stupid to start bitching about it now.
@Zorlac: Sigh. That was the argument you were making with Marky360 below when you called him a liar. Show me these comments with people saying you have to repurchase 360 games. I see none. Therefore, you are the liar spreading false information.
@hellnawafflecar: @Zorlac: I've skimmed through the comments twice now. I can't find anyone who said that. Care to point them out? I agree it's a lie, but so is saying people are trying to spread false information when they're not. I saw one comment mention how you can (meaning, you have the option to) buy digital copies of backwards compatible 360 games directly from the X1 store. Which is true, and not a negative thing. I didn't see anyone claiming a second purchase is required if you already own it.
Edit: I also see a comment that YOU misunderstood. Someone said they owned a game on PS3 and would have to buy it again in order to play it on the X1. Sorry, but their PS3 disc won't work on the X1, and they would have to "buy the game again" in order to play it on the X1.
@7tizz: You know what plays ALL my 360 games? My 360. You know what plays Forza and Microsoft's other decent 'exclusives' better than the X1 or the Scorpio ever will? My PC. The X1 has no value. It never has. That doesn't stop you from defending it every damn day.
mddg_mmcc's comments