Avatar

*stands on relatively modest soapbox* (Destiny)

by stabbim @, Des Moines, IA, USA, Saturday, April 26, 2014, 18:12 (3661 days ago) @ SonofMacPhisto

It's probably not an efficient return on investment for the owners, since the main reasons I've seen for it are historical preservation, recreational enjoyment/nostalgia, and so on. Those things are important, but not profitable. Sad face.

Right. The problem with it is that no matter how cost-effectively you engineer your backwards-compat solution, you're still just enabling people to play games that you're not selling anymore. Unless you continue to sell old-gen games for eternity, but there's only so much room on store shelves, you know?

Of course, digital distribution can solve a lot of these problems, but only on platforms where system architecture isn't an impediment.

I'm not saying I don't want backwards compatibility. But I don't see how it's profitable.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread