1. If you have the games, keep the system
There's this false assumption that with every iteration of a new console, the big three companies MUST put backwards compatibility in it. I think what most of these gamers forget is that backwards compatibility is a luxury, not a standard for consoles. Think about it. To my knowledge, the PS2 was the first console to really allow gamers to play games from the previous generation. We never had that with the transition to other consoles like the NES to SNES, the Genesis to Saturn, SNES to Gamecube, etc. You could argue that handhelds for the most part has been able to do that, but there's iterations there where that isn't true.
The problem is, most companies hear consumers complain about the price. In their effort to make the systems cheaper, they have to cut out parts of the system. If gamers are concerned about playing old games, shouldn't they have the system for those games already? If not, why get rid of it since there shouldn't be any guarantee the new system can play them? Companies are not held to any obligation to keep old system hardware in a new hardware iteration. This isn't anything new, and has happened for quite some time. The transition from VHS to DVD. Cassette tapes to Cd's. This is just going to be another transition where they held on to the ability to do it for a while, but it's time to phase that option out. Gamers need to get over it and keep the system they want those games on or realize that companies need money to function. One of their ways to capitalize on this idea, is by offering new methods to pay for old games.
2. Collections and Classics
There's been an influx of video games coming both digitally and retail involving the purchasing of old video games from previous generations. For example, you can purchase old Final Fantasy games on PSN from the PS1 Classics part of the store. If you enjoyed games like God of War or Devil May Cry, both have had HD collections of past games on a disc. Gamers who've already played these games see it as a money grab from them, but they forget there's new gamers who have never experienced these games. If anyone should be buying these, it's those gamers. Not the smitten ones.
This is yet another reason why the companies will keep the systems from having backwards compatibility. Why allow them to play old owned games from systems they didn't feel were worth keeping around when they can release them again to be purchased? Final Fantasy 4 is the perfect example of this as it's released on practically everything. It's become such a staple for a console/handheld that it should be mentioned up there with the likes of Ridge Racer and it being a release day game.
It's easy for them to make money off of love for old games. Add in something like achievements or better graphics in parts (not all, even) of the game, and it's likely to still sell. That will be one benefit the companies see in phasing out backwards compatibility and offering these games again for not only cheap, but slightly better versions of the game graphically.
3. Forced to Buy
Customers have this warped sense of logic when it comes to re-release of old games. They believe that if a company removes backwards compatibility and releases the game digitally or on disc, then they MUST purchase the game. Customers apparently have all free-will stripped from their souls when companies do this, because they have no choice but to purchase these games they release.
It's all utter nonsense as the companies aren't forcing gamers to purchase anything. Just because they don't allow the game to be played on a new system and are releasing it in new formats doesn't mean it's the only way to play it now. If you have the game, go play it on the system it was created for. This selfish and ridiculous belief that the game you own is unplayable now and the new release is the only method to experience it is possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
It's one thing to dislike the company for removing something you felt was a bonus, but it's something else entirely for an idiotic notion that it's the only way to play the game now. These gamers need to rethink what they say before they spout these imaginary realities of how consumerism works.
4. It's a Bonus
I have to reiterate this. These console developers are not obligated by any means to incorporate ways to play old games. The consoles are being created to play new experiences with possible means to play older games. If those means are to repurchase the games, then so be it. That is their decision to make. If consumers don't like it, they have other means to play the games. Either by the console the game was created for or emulation. The first option would be preferred, but some games I can't really frown on by using the latter.
If this generation of consoles didn't allow for users to play old games like the original models allowed (which didn't work on 100% of games anyhow), would this still be a problem? Probably. The Internet wasn't really available to everyone in earlier years of gaming, so I'm not sure how loud the outcry is over backwards compatibility between consoles, but I'm sure it was still there. But it's loudest now because it became a reality. But it's something the companies gave their consumers as a bonus and never once did they say they will continue to release consoles with the ability to play older games. We as fans seem to ignore that and expect it. We are greedy, but like to project our greed on companies to make them seem greedier.
5. Fans Do Have a Point...
Companies shot themselves in the foot by showing it's possible. They can't really blame the consumers for wanting something as great as backwards compatibility for new consoles when they showed it's possible to do so. Gamers want a reason to buy a new console and ditch the old one. Why do they want 8 different consoles in their home when they can condense it down to two or three? And why would they want to purchase the same game on different platforms when they already own a copy?
Piracy and emulation is something that a lot of publishers and developers may frown on, but when gamers already own one (or in some cases many) copies of a game, they don't want to purchase it once again. They will go to more extreme measures to play the game especially if they feel cheated by big wigs who don't look at it from their point of view. You take into consideration that some of these games are no longer in print, their copy has stopped working, or any other potential problems, the fallback solution may not rub those looking to sell another copy the right way.
Consumers should be heard. It's their money being spent on games that are changed very little but have the same going price as a brand new game from 15 years ago. If they can purchase a used game off eBay for $5 for the Gamecube, why would they want to then spent $29.99 on the same game for the WiiU especially if there were no changes other than it being put on a different disc format? Fans are not hesitant to verbalize their feelings on the statement, and it's not unreasonable for them to do so either.
As a fan, backwards compatibility is fantastic. It allows me to sell or trade in an old console and buy a new one and reduce the number I have lying around my TV or shoving into the back of my closet. I can spend my money on newer games instead of games I already have in my collection and I also have games to fall back on while newer games are in production. But as someone who also sees the side of the companies, it makes sense for them to take the option off. It lowers the price of the console like most gamers want and gives them the ability to re-release games to not only give the experience to new gamers, but also make money off of anyone who wants to play the game on the new system. However, it is their right to take out backwards compatibility and re-release old games whenever they want. It is their product and they can make it however they choose.
No comments:
Post a Comment