First console to have temporary backward compatibility












1















The first five generations of game consoles typically had no backward compatibility. New console, new hardware design, new games. (An exception was the Atari 7800, which as far as I know was the first console to have backward compatibility. Conjecture: this was because it was released in the aftermath of Atari's dramatic fall from leading position, creating a very strong incentive to try to recapture what they had.)



The PlayStation 2 famously had backward compatibility, essentially by incorporating a PS1 onto a chip (and of course taking advantage of the ability of a DVD drive to read CDs).



But subsequent consoles such as the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii began a strange pattern: initial backward compatibility subsequently dropped in a cost-reduced model. I can understand the desire to reduce cost by cutting features, and that backward compatibility is less important as a console builds up its own catalog, but I would also have expected the cost of continuing to provide it to keep dropping. (If it's just one cheap chip, might as well keep it.)



Conjecture: By the seventh generation, silicon process technology was not improving as rapidly as it had, so the cost of continuing to provide backward compatibility stayed nontrivial.



Alternative conjecture: Moore's law was still running fine, and the real reason for dropping compatibility was to encourage people to buy new games, which is where the profit in the console business comes from.



The first conjecture would predict temporary backward compatibility began with the seventh generation. The second would predict it could happen in any generation (except where there was something like a medium change from cartridge to disk).



So:



What was the first console to have temporary backward compatibility? Did it happen before the seventh generation?










share|improve this question



























    1















    The first five generations of game consoles typically had no backward compatibility. New console, new hardware design, new games. (An exception was the Atari 7800, which as far as I know was the first console to have backward compatibility. Conjecture: this was because it was released in the aftermath of Atari's dramatic fall from leading position, creating a very strong incentive to try to recapture what they had.)



    The PlayStation 2 famously had backward compatibility, essentially by incorporating a PS1 onto a chip (and of course taking advantage of the ability of a DVD drive to read CDs).



    But subsequent consoles such as the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii began a strange pattern: initial backward compatibility subsequently dropped in a cost-reduced model. I can understand the desire to reduce cost by cutting features, and that backward compatibility is less important as a console builds up its own catalog, but I would also have expected the cost of continuing to provide it to keep dropping. (If it's just one cheap chip, might as well keep it.)



    Conjecture: By the seventh generation, silicon process technology was not improving as rapidly as it had, so the cost of continuing to provide backward compatibility stayed nontrivial.



    Alternative conjecture: Moore's law was still running fine, and the real reason for dropping compatibility was to encourage people to buy new games, which is where the profit in the console business comes from.



    The first conjecture would predict temporary backward compatibility began with the seventh generation. The second would predict it could happen in any generation (except where there was something like a medium change from cartridge to disk).



    So:



    What was the first console to have temporary backward compatibility? Did it happen before the seventh generation?










    share|improve this question

























      1












      1








      1








      The first five generations of game consoles typically had no backward compatibility. New console, new hardware design, new games. (An exception was the Atari 7800, which as far as I know was the first console to have backward compatibility. Conjecture: this was because it was released in the aftermath of Atari's dramatic fall from leading position, creating a very strong incentive to try to recapture what they had.)



      The PlayStation 2 famously had backward compatibility, essentially by incorporating a PS1 onto a chip (and of course taking advantage of the ability of a DVD drive to read CDs).



      But subsequent consoles such as the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii began a strange pattern: initial backward compatibility subsequently dropped in a cost-reduced model. I can understand the desire to reduce cost by cutting features, and that backward compatibility is less important as a console builds up its own catalog, but I would also have expected the cost of continuing to provide it to keep dropping. (If it's just one cheap chip, might as well keep it.)



      Conjecture: By the seventh generation, silicon process technology was not improving as rapidly as it had, so the cost of continuing to provide backward compatibility stayed nontrivial.



      Alternative conjecture: Moore's law was still running fine, and the real reason for dropping compatibility was to encourage people to buy new games, which is where the profit in the console business comes from.



      The first conjecture would predict temporary backward compatibility began with the seventh generation. The second would predict it could happen in any generation (except where there was something like a medium change from cartridge to disk).



      So:



      What was the first console to have temporary backward compatibility? Did it happen before the seventh generation?










      share|improve this question














      The first five generations of game consoles typically had no backward compatibility. New console, new hardware design, new games. (An exception was the Atari 7800, which as far as I know was the first console to have backward compatibility. Conjecture: this was because it was released in the aftermath of Atari's dramatic fall from leading position, creating a very strong incentive to try to recapture what they had.)



      The PlayStation 2 famously had backward compatibility, essentially by incorporating a PS1 onto a chip (and of course taking advantage of the ability of a DVD drive to read CDs).



      But subsequent consoles such as the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii began a strange pattern: initial backward compatibility subsequently dropped in a cost-reduced model. I can understand the desire to reduce cost by cutting features, and that backward compatibility is less important as a console builds up its own catalog, but I would also have expected the cost of continuing to provide it to keep dropping. (If it's just one cheap chip, might as well keep it.)



      Conjecture: By the seventh generation, silicon process technology was not improving as rapidly as it had, so the cost of continuing to provide backward compatibility stayed nontrivial.



      Alternative conjecture: Moore's law was still running fine, and the real reason for dropping compatibility was to encourage people to buy new games, which is where the profit in the console business comes from.



      The first conjecture would predict temporary backward compatibility began with the seventh generation. The second would predict it could happen in any generation (except where there was something like a medium change from cartridge to disk).



      So:



      What was the first console to have temporary backward compatibility? Did it happen before the seventh generation?







      history game-consoles backward-compatibility






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 3 hours ago









      rwallacerwallace

      11.1k456162




      11.1k456162






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          The Mega Drive 1 and 2 can run Master System software via the Powerbase Converter. Neither the Nomad (the portable Mega Drive) nor the Mega Drive 3 are capable of doing so without further internal modification.



          I therefore posit the Mega Drive.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1





            At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

            – Matt Lacey
            2 hours ago






          • 1





            Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

            – Matthew Barber
            1 hour ago



















          1














          The Mega Drive/Genesis is the obvious answer, but I can also make a case for the earlier Master System. Initial models were fully compatible with Sega's prior console, the somewhat obscure SG-1000. However, with the removal of the card slot and expansion port in later revisions this was severely eroded. Some games on cartridges may still work, but anything on a card or that requires a peripheral will definitely leave you out of luck. It has to be said that there weren't a lot of SG-1000 games seen in the West in the first place though.



          What I'd suspect it comes down to is that backwards compatibility is of high utility on new consoles. Their games library is small and there's a lot of extra utility in enabling the machines to access the software for their immediate predecessors. However, as time goes by this utility is eroded, and any extra hardware required to support them becomes dead weight. If removing it offers any potential for a price drop, that's inevitably going to happen at some point.






          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "648"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9708%2ffirst-console-to-have-temporary-backward-compatibility%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3














            The Mega Drive 1 and 2 can run Master System software via the Powerbase Converter. Neither the Nomad (the portable Mega Drive) nor the Mega Drive 3 are capable of doing so without further internal modification.



            I therefore posit the Mega Drive.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1





              At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

              – Matt Lacey
              2 hours ago






            • 1





              Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

              – Matthew Barber
              1 hour ago
















            3














            The Mega Drive 1 and 2 can run Master System software via the Powerbase Converter. Neither the Nomad (the portable Mega Drive) nor the Mega Drive 3 are capable of doing so without further internal modification.



            I therefore posit the Mega Drive.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 1





              At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

              – Matt Lacey
              2 hours ago






            • 1





              Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

              – Matthew Barber
              1 hour ago














            3












            3








            3







            The Mega Drive 1 and 2 can run Master System software via the Powerbase Converter. Neither the Nomad (the portable Mega Drive) nor the Mega Drive 3 are capable of doing so without further internal modification.



            I therefore posit the Mega Drive.






            share|improve this answer













            The Mega Drive 1 and 2 can run Master System software via the Powerbase Converter. Neither the Nomad (the portable Mega Drive) nor the Mega Drive 3 are capable of doing so without further internal modification.



            I therefore posit the Mega Drive.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 2 hours ago









            TommyTommy

            16.1k14778




            16.1k14778








            • 1





              At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

              – Matt Lacey
              2 hours ago






            • 1





              Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

              – Matthew Barber
              1 hour ago














            • 1





              At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

              – Matt Lacey
              2 hours ago






            • 1





              Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

              – Matthew Barber
              1 hour ago








            1




            1





            At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

            – Matt Lacey
            2 hours ago





            At first blush this seems like it'd be invalid because of the extra hardware, but I recalled something about the Converter being extremely simple, and from some quick research it does seem to be for the most part a mechanical adapter. It does enable the SMS mode on the Megadrive, but it's the console itself that has the support.

            – Matt Lacey
            2 hours ago




            1




            1





            Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

            – Matthew Barber
            1 hour ago





            Yes, it's basically just a pass-through. The reason why it doesn't work in some models is because the pins in the cartridge port aren't wired up.

            – Matthew Barber
            1 hour ago











            1














            The Mega Drive/Genesis is the obvious answer, but I can also make a case for the earlier Master System. Initial models were fully compatible with Sega's prior console, the somewhat obscure SG-1000. However, with the removal of the card slot and expansion port in later revisions this was severely eroded. Some games on cartridges may still work, but anything on a card or that requires a peripheral will definitely leave you out of luck. It has to be said that there weren't a lot of SG-1000 games seen in the West in the first place though.



            What I'd suspect it comes down to is that backwards compatibility is of high utility on new consoles. Their games library is small and there's a lot of extra utility in enabling the machines to access the software for their immediate predecessors. However, as time goes by this utility is eroded, and any extra hardware required to support them becomes dead weight. If removing it offers any potential for a price drop, that's inevitably going to happen at some point.






            share|improve this answer




























              1














              The Mega Drive/Genesis is the obvious answer, but I can also make a case for the earlier Master System. Initial models were fully compatible with Sega's prior console, the somewhat obscure SG-1000. However, with the removal of the card slot and expansion port in later revisions this was severely eroded. Some games on cartridges may still work, but anything on a card or that requires a peripheral will definitely leave you out of luck. It has to be said that there weren't a lot of SG-1000 games seen in the West in the first place though.



              What I'd suspect it comes down to is that backwards compatibility is of high utility on new consoles. Their games library is small and there's a lot of extra utility in enabling the machines to access the software for their immediate predecessors. However, as time goes by this utility is eroded, and any extra hardware required to support them becomes dead weight. If removing it offers any potential for a price drop, that's inevitably going to happen at some point.






              share|improve this answer


























                1












                1








                1







                The Mega Drive/Genesis is the obvious answer, but I can also make a case for the earlier Master System. Initial models were fully compatible with Sega's prior console, the somewhat obscure SG-1000. However, with the removal of the card slot and expansion port in later revisions this was severely eroded. Some games on cartridges may still work, but anything on a card or that requires a peripheral will definitely leave you out of luck. It has to be said that there weren't a lot of SG-1000 games seen in the West in the first place though.



                What I'd suspect it comes down to is that backwards compatibility is of high utility on new consoles. Their games library is small and there's a lot of extra utility in enabling the machines to access the software for their immediate predecessors. However, as time goes by this utility is eroded, and any extra hardware required to support them becomes dead weight. If removing it offers any potential for a price drop, that's inevitably going to happen at some point.






                share|improve this answer













                The Mega Drive/Genesis is the obvious answer, but I can also make a case for the earlier Master System. Initial models were fully compatible with Sega's prior console, the somewhat obscure SG-1000. However, with the removal of the card slot and expansion port in later revisions this was severely eroded. Some games on cartridges may still work, but anything on a card or that requires a peripheral will definitely leave you out of luck. It has to be said that there weren't a lot of SG-1000 games seen in the West in the first place though.



                What I'd suspect it comes down to is that backwards compatibility is of high utility on new consoles. Their games library is small and there's a lot of extra utility in enabling the machines to access the software for their immediate predecessors. However, as time goes by this utility is eroded, and any extra hardware required to support them becomes dead weight. If removing it offers any potential for a price drop, that's inevitably going to happen at some point.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 1 hour ago









                Matthew BarberMatthew Barber

                45623




                45623






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9708%2ffirst-console-to-have-temporary-backward-compatibility%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Statuo de Libereco

                    Tanganjiko

                    Liste der Baudenkmäler in Enneberg