作者：Josh Bycer

上周，微软公布了其新游戏主机Xbox One，并宣布计划将Xbox One打造成为面向每家每户的多媒体平台。随着发布会后越来越多消息浮出水面，玩家们也为各种公开的计划感到厌烦。

微软的计划之一是取消360和原版Xbox的向后兼容性。我曾数次提到向后兼容的重要性，但我们还能提这个要求多少次？

硬件问题

在我之前写的文章《timelessness vs. collectability》中，我提到经典游戏无法再造。一部分原因是游戏设计的演化，另一部分原因是消费者基础的变化和发展。

因为大多数玩家喜欢简单上手的游戏，所以非常复杂的游戏已不多见。但另一方面，有许多经典游戏之所以成为经典就是因为其复杂度，然而现在的市场却抛弃了这种复杂度。

不幸的是，与其他消费行业相比，复兴过去的游戏困难重重。难就难在，需要大量工作和设备：你需要游戏，合适的系统和所有关键的外围设备与辅助程序。

取决于上述游戏和系统，现在要玩到老游戏需要花费高出原价数倍的价格。这就是向后兼容性的主要吸引力所在：压缩必要设备和降低价格。

至于PC游戏，虽然大多数老游戏可以在不使用现在的硬件的设备上运行，但因为GOG.com等网站和DosBox等模拟软件的存在，模拟这些游戏变得更容易了。

NocturneGamespy（from game-wisdom）

PS2上有许多好游戏如《Nocturne》，但10年以后我们再玩到它们的可能性有多少？

但随着新一代游戏机和手持设备的推出，保留老游戏更加困难了。原因是缺少游戏平台和硬件的标准化。

例如SNES、Genesis和Game Boy，这三种游戏机的技术和硬件架构是完全不同的。

这导致运行老游戏的过程更加困难，因为需要更多时间和工作；这是其他游戏不必面对的麻烦。

以书本做个不太公平的比较，因为印刷技术越来越简单，保存旧书也越来越容易。再以电影做比较，因为大多数大电影的技术都标准化了，所以还原和保存旧电影并不困难。

在Amazon网站上，我可以购买50多年以前的老电影和老电视节目的DVD和蓝光碟。但是现在我们又还能买到多少红白机游戏或者Playstation 2游戏呢？

当模拟老游戏的必要技术被淘汰或废弃时，不同的硬件将面临另一个问题。据报道，Playstation 4已经不直接兼容PS3了，原因与PS3的单元处理器有关。

因为索尼已经抛弃那项技术了。PS4不再使用那种技术意味着能直接模拟和运行PS3游戏的本地硬件也不存在了。

因为以上原因，大多数人（包括我本人）并不太为Xbox One或PS4的问世感到激动兴奋，而向后兼容性还有另一个大障碍：消费者基础。

消费者基础

在后向兼容性的争论中，其不利理由是：“谁关心呢？”虽然这个原因让人悲伤，但游戏的普遍消费者都持有这个观点。

普遍的消费者认为最新版本的产品才是最好的：新车、新电视、新手机等等。其充分理由是，技术革新带动产品进步。这十年内手机技术的变化和改进就证明了这一点。

对于游戏机和手执设备，人们也抱有相同的看法：设备越新，性能越强大，游戏体验自然也越好（我本人倒不一定这么认为）。一般的消费者通常对玩老游戏没什么兴趣。我们不能不正视这个事实：大多数老游戏的晚年过得并不顺。

当然有例外，如新发行的强化版的《旺达与巨像》和《合金装备》系列，吸引了广泛关注。

Mario64wikipedia（from game-wisdom）

任天堂可能会留下《马里奥 64》。

有的游戏经过重制，不仅优化了显示，还增加了新特性，如《最终幻想战略版》和《皇家骑士团》。

再看看AAA级游戏的开发，如每年推出新版的《疯狂橄榄球》和《使命召唤》，我们可以更容易地看出为什么一般的消费者只想要最新版本。因为每年发行一个新版，游戏的唯一性和特性就不存在了，使该系列的旧版本更加显得过时。

消费者有什么理由去购买第一版《使命召唤：黑色行动》而不是第二版？或者购买《疯狂橄榄球2005》而不是等待即将发布的新版？

当大多数消费者都对老游戏失去兴趣时，我们就不难做出淘汰它们的决定了。为了继续增加必要的本地硬件，开发者可能会耗费更多的开发时间和成本在一个受众可能无视的功能上。

更别说，在模拟老游戏上花更多钱意味着在改进硬件上花的钱的就要减少。随着技术进步，保存老游戏的方案有两个。

云端游戏

随着世界更加网络化，串流游戏的概念也可能成为现实。“串流”是指，在能够运行软件的服务器上玩模拟游戏，由服务器将游戏传输到你的游戏机或电脑上。基本上，你只要能让设备连上网络就能玩游戏，而不需要考虑硬件问题。

据说，索尼正在与Gaikai（游戏邦注：这是一家掌握了串流技术的云游戏服务公司，已被索尼收购）合作，打算通过“云游戏”在PS4上模拟PS1、PS2和PS3的游戏。

理论上，这听起来不错。但在我看来，这个办法对于游戏保存问题只是治标不治本。使用串流技术和云储存技术玩游戏，意味着玩家不必在自己的设备上存放游戏，而是由服务器提供游戏。

但还是存在问题，如果服务器崩溃或者索尼决定在一代或两代游戏之后移除这个功能，那会怎么样？当然，Steam已经普及云储存了，然而，Steam关闭与索尼关闭服务器是两个不同的问题。

Jetforcegeminigiantbomb（from game-wisdom）

但像《Jet Force Gemini》这种不算非常成功游戏怎么办呢？

个人认为，最好的解决办法是，有一个类似于GOG的服务器，但针对的是游戏机和手持设备的游戏。

不是焦虑开发降低成本的新硬件。而是考虑从开发者和平台制造商手中获得授权这个大问题。

然而，像这样的服务可以算是一场双赢：一方面，制造商不必担心因为不肯在向后兼容性上花钱而惹恼粉丝，另一方面，小众玩家也可能继续玩他们的老游戏。

现在，我们不得不提出疑问：游戏到底是艺术还是商品？如果是商品，那么保存它们不就像收藏第一代手机？

但如果游戏是艺术，那么为什么我们居然还需要为游戏保存制定长期计划？显然，微软和索尼并不太关注保存老游戏的问题。

最近十年，游戏行业获得长足的发展，游戏创意之作更是遍地开花。如果不能为未来的玩家留下这些游戏精品，那将会是行业的耻辱。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Backwards Compatibility: The Art vs. Business Debate Redux

by Josh Bycer

Last week, Microsoft announced the next Xbox console: Xbox One, with plans to turn it into a multimedia platform for every home. As more information came following the conference, gamers became increasingly annoyed with the revealed plans.

One of which was the removal of backwards compatibility with the 360 and original Xbox. I’ve mentioned several times already how vital I view it, but how many times can we bark up the same tree?

Not So Pick Up and Play:

In my piece on timelessness vs. collectability I talked about how classic games just aren’t being made anymore. Part of the reason was due to game design evolving and the other was the changing and growing consumer base.

We don’t see immensely complicated games as much anymore as most people want those that can be picked up and played easily. But on the flip side, there are many great classic titles that still stand as amazing games due to the complexities that would have been removed in today’s market.

Unfortunately reliving our past is a lot harder compared to other consumer industries. The problem is that there is a lot more work and equipment needed: you need the game, the correct system and any vital peripherals and accessories.

Depending on the game and system in question, it could cost you several times more to play them now than it did buying them new back in the day. This is the main allure of backwards compatibility: allowing you to condense the equipment needed and reduce the price.

With PC games, while most older titles ran on machines that couldn’t come close to today’s hardware, game emulation is a lot easier thanks to sites like GOG.com and emulating software like DosBox.
NocturneGamespy 300×181 Backwards Compatibility: The Art vs. Business Debate Redux

The PS2 saw a number of amazing games like Nocturne released, but what is the chance that we’ll still be able to play them in ten years?

But with each new generation of consoles and handhelds, preserving the past becomes that much harder. The problem is the lack of standardization between game platforms and hardware.

When you look at the SNES, Genesis and Game Boy, you have three completely different pieces of technology and hardware architecture.

This makes the process of running these older titles that much harder as it requires more time and work; a hassle that other hobbies don’t have to deal with.

While not a fair comparison books are very easy to preserve as the act of printing has become easier and easier over the years. Film would be a good example, since the technology was standardize for most major films, it made the practices and techniques to restore and preserve them easier.

Looking on Amazon, I can buy DVDs and Blu-Ray editions of movies and TV shows that were anywhere from 50 to 70 years old and watch them today. How many of you think that someday I could do the same thing with NES games, or even just Playstation 2 titles?

Another problem with varying hardware is what happens when the technology needed to emulate them becomes obsolete or abandoned. The Playstation 4 has been revealed to not be directly compatible with the PS3 and the reason has to do with the cell processor in the PS3.

Since Sony is moving away from the technology, they’re not going to have it in the PS4 meaning that the native hardware needed to directly emulate and run PS3 games won’t be there.

Now, while most people (including me) are not exactly thrilled about the Xbox One or PS4 announcement, there is one other major hurdle for backwards compatibility: the consumer base.

Products vs. Preservation

When the argument relit over backwards compatibility the number one reason against it was: “who cares?” And sad to say, but the general consumer base of the game industry shares that sentiment.

The general consumer is conditioned to view the latest version as the superior product: new cars, TVs, phones and so on. This is for good reason as technology continues to improve and so does these products. Look at how much cell phone technology has changed and improved in a decade.

With game consoles and handhelds the same opinion is held: the newer the device the more powerful it is which equals better games (this opinion not always held by yours truly.) The general consumer is more often than not, uninterested in playing older titles. And let’s face it; the majority of older games have not aged well.

Mario64wikipedia 300×218 Backwards Compatibility: The Art vs. Business Debate Redux

While there is a good chance that Nintendo will keep Mario 64 available to buy…

Of course there are exceptions such as enhanced re-releases like the Ico Collection or Metal Gear Solid collection that drum up interest due to the notoriety of the games.

Or when a game is remade and released with better graphics and more features like Final Fantasy Tactics or Tactics Ogre.

Looking at the state of AAA development with annual series like Madden and Call of Duty it becomes easier to see why the general consumer only wants the newest version. With annual releases, you lose a lot of the uniqueness and quality of making a game and it renders older games in the series obsolete.

Tell me; is there any reason for the general consumer to buy the first Call of Duty Black Ops over the second? Or Madden 2005 over whatever version is coming out soon?

When the majority of the consumer base is not interested in playing older games, it makes the decision to leave it out that much easier. To continue adding the native hardware needed, would cost console developments more time and money on a feature that most of their audience would probably ignore.

Not to mention the fact that the more development spent on emulating older titles means less development spent on advancing the hardware to run more powerful games. As technology continues to improve there are two potential solutions to game preservation.

Streaming Success:

As the world becomes increasingly more wired with every year, the idea of streaming games may become a possibility. Streaming refers to playing emulated games off of a server that is capable of running the software and having that streamed to your game console or computer. You are essentially taking hardware out of the equation in terms of playing the game and putting it on your internet connection.

Sony is rumored to be looking at this as a way of emulating PS 1,2 and 3 titles on the PS 4 and teaming up with the company Gaikai, co-founded by David Perry.

While this sounds great in theory, in my opinion we’re just putting a bandage on the problem of game preservation. With playing games using streaming and cloud storage, the user does not actually own a copy of the game and is tethered to the service.

Once again raising the problem of what happens when the servers go down, or if Sony decides to move away from this in one or two console iterations. Granted cloud storage has become popular with Steam, however there is a big difference between wondering if Steam will be shut down vs. Sony pulling the plug on their servers.
Jetforcegeminigiantbomb 300×225 Backwards Compatibility: The Art vs. Business Debate Redux

… but what about games like Jet Force Gemini, that weren’t major hits?

Personally I think the best solution would be to have a service similar to GOG but for console and handheld games.

Not having to worry about developing brand new hardware should cut down on cost.  The big issue of course is getting the license from the developers and platform manufacturers.

However a service like that could be viewed as a win-win: The manufacturers won’t have to worry about spending development on backwards compatibility and angering the fan base and the niche fan-base would be able to keep playing their games.

This is when we need to ask the question: Are games really considered art, or are they nothing but products? If they are the latter, then the desire to preserve them would be like wanting to hold on to first generation cell-phones.

But if they are considered art, then we should start taking steps to establish a long-term plan for game preservation. As apparently, Microsoft and Sony aren’t too worried about preserving games for more than a generation at a time.

The last decade saw a huge amount of growth and creativity all around from the industry and it would be a shame to not preserve it for future generations.(source:game-wisdom)