The unfortunate state of game preservation

[Sir-Syzygy]

*The following is an excerpt from my own "about me" section on this very site*

I feel most don't realize the unfortunate state of video game preservation. Unlike other art forms, (film, music, literature etc) you can't easily access classic video games due to outdated hardware and such.

Granted, we occasionally receive HD collections, ala 'Metal Gear Solid HD Collection' or 'The Ico & Shadow of the Colossus Collection'. However, sometimes the original masterpieces are altered in such a way that the whole process is rendered pointless; the 'Silent Hill HD Collection' being the most famous blunder of that type. I'm also not a huge fan of the "from the ground up" remakes (E.g. Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy & Shadow of the Colossus 2018 remake). They're a cool idea, but the notion that video games need updated graphics to be justified re-releases is something that, without exaggeration, makes me sick. I view them in the same way as the infamous 'Star Wars Special Editions' (albeit with less discontent), as they change a lot of elements that I liked to begin with (E.g. I prefer the art-style of the original 'Shadow of the Colossus' over the 2018 remake). I did happen to prefer the N. Sane Trilogy art-style over the PS1 graphics but I know a lot of people who really didn't.

Personally, I believe the best remakes are the ones that include the original visions, such as 'Halo: The Master Chief Collection' or 'Metroid: Zero Mission'. Games don't require technically impressive graphics to be relevant, as long as they play well, I want them untouched. 

I hope my perspective is understood, this is something I am deeply passionate about and wish to discuss with anyone willing to have a reasonable discussion.

Be sure you know what you're talking about before replying, I consistently find people don't understand this specific topic when in discussion.

 

EDIT: So it's clear (since a few people don't seem to understand): 

This topic is about how many video games are extremely hard to pass on to future generations due to outdated hardware (E.g. Ratchet & Clank (2002) and MGS4). It is also about how sometimes, even when games are remastered, they're altered to the point of basically being a completely different product. Ala 'Silent Hill HD Collection'; the change of voice actors, in particular, is especially notable (just imagine if the voices were changed for the Metal Gear remasters). This also includes things such as 'Crash Bandicoot: N. Sane Trilogy', while being a game I like, the graphics change really wasn't something I appreciated or felt looked nice. 

 

Edited May 2, 2018 by Crispy78923

[Sir_Bee]

Is it really that important to preserve beyond the fact that they still exist?  And it isn't just video games that would have this problem, it is anything that using any form of technology at all to be observed.  Films that were printed on the old film reels, Music that was printed on vinyl (while still not rare, wont be forever) or what about cassette tapes or 8-track?  Photography negatives that would need to be developed (again, still around but not forever).  This even goes into other mediums like the automobile.  What about all the beautiful cars that were made in the early 1900's?  Cars that run on leaded fuel, or are broken down in general without the original parts to repair them?

 

We still have the games that were made early on, they are just uncommon, and run on outdated tech.  We don't need to keep the old games front and center by re-making them, or HD re-releases.

 

Why should a game maker be obligated to include the original game?  I don't think that makes any sense?  What value would the original game have to 90% of the audience who don't have the tech to play it?  And if you suggest that they should make the original game run on current tech, that is a HUGE ask, and not reasonable to expect. 

 

Your question is a really bad example, as it forces you to pick between two bad options.  If you don't want to have the company be obligated to release the original game with any new remake, you must hate art and its preservation.  I believe that is called a false dichotomy.  

Edited April 16, 2018 by Sir_Bee

[Squirlruler]

7 minutes ago, Crispy78923 said:

Unlike other art forms, (film, music, literature etc)

I think this is a bad premise because we lose this all the time with different formats (Such as, Beta, VHS, Vinyl etc etc). Once those technologies are no longer "mainstream" you lose them, much like current video games. However, making digital copies will more "permanent". I think the same could be said with video games. There are a bunch that have digital emulators. 

 

I do think there should be some way of preserving video games, since I do agree that they are definitely art. I am not sure about the best way to go, though. I like the idea of "modernizing" games for newer generations. This would make it more appealing to more people. I do think it would be a good idea to preserve the originals as well. 

[Sir-Syzygy]

1 hour ago, Sir_Bee said:

Is it really that important to preserve beyond the fact that they still exist?  And it isn't just video games that would have this problem, it is anything that using any form of technology at all to be observed.  Films that were printed on the old film reels, Music that was printed on vinyl (while still not rare, wont be forever) or what about cassette tapes or 8-track?  Photography negatives that would need to be developed (again, still around but not forever).  This even goes into other mediums like the automobile.  What about all the beautiful cars that were made in the early 1900's?  Cars that run on leaded fuel, or are broken down in general without the original parts to repair them?

 

We still have the games that were made early on, they are just uncommon, and run on outdated tech.  We don't need to keep the old games front and center by re-making them, or HD re-releases.  

What on earth are you talking about? Both film and music are preserved, most famously with the Criterion Collection and their treatment of vintage films. Gaming has no such equivalent. 

 

1 hour ago, Squirlruler said:

I think this is a bad premise because we lose this all the time with different formats (Such as, Beta, VHS, Vinyl etc etc). Once those technologies are no longer "mainstream" you lose them, much like current video games. However, making digital copies will more "permanent". I think the same could be said with video games. There are a bunch that have digital emulators. 

 

I do think there should be some way of preserving video games, since I do agree that they are definitely art. I am not sure about the best way to go, though. I like the idea of "modernizing" games for newer generations. This would make it more appealing to more people. I do think it would be a good idea to preserve the originals as well. 

4

@Squirlruler What I said to @Sir_Bee applies in some capacity to you as well. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Crispy78923

[Kittet3]

Something I think that is missing from your perspective is that the original hardware to play these games often gives a different experience than playing with a modern controller. Playing on an arcade machine where you have to stand the entire time and playing with the Nintendo 64 controller that use to give my thumbs blisters is a lot different than playing on the better designed modern controllers. The start screen of the PS1 and PS2 and watching the circle spin and then give you the message that your disc is unreadable offers a much different experience than clicking on a digital game. 

 

I'm all for digital games being preserved in their original forms with their original hardware. Imagine a digital game museum where you can play with the old controllers and experience the games as they were. However, I disagree with the idea that remakes/remasters are preserving games. They are more like history books or art reprints- they are making the concepts accessible but they are missing key details that are important. 

 

EDIT: Also your poll is horribly biased

Edited April 16, 2018 by Kittet3

[Sir-Syzygy]

10 minutes ago, Sir_Bee said:

Your question is a really bad example, as it forces you to pick between two bad options.  If you don't want to have the company be obligated to release the original game with any new remake, you must hate art and its preservation.  I believe that is called a false dichotomy.  

 

The poll isn't the main part of this. Just don't vote if you feel that way. 

[Sir_Bee]

Emulators do exist, and they would be the best way to preserve the original product, and have it keep up with modern technology.  I still don't think that it is developers' responsibility to keep updating and giving out their old products for free.

Edited April 16, 2018 by Sir_Bee

[Sir-Syzygy]

2 minutes ago, Sir_Bee said:

Emulators do exist, and they would be the best way to preserve the original product, and have it keep up with modern technology.  I still don't think that it is developers' responsibility to keep updating and giving out their old products for free.

I adore emulators, truly. Sadly, many games aren't available in that way, also part of the problem. I suppose I see what you mean, but I still feel that if they release a remake for a premium price, it should be a standard for the original visions to be included. 

[Sir_Bee]

4 minutes ago, Crispy78923 said:

I adore emulators, truly. Sadly, many games aren't available in that way, also part of the problem. I suppose I see what you mean, but I still feel that if they release a remake for a premium price, it should be a standard for the original visions to be included. 

 

But the original in what capacity?  Do you expect to be able to play said original on your modern machine, or do you just want a digital file that contains the original game that won't run unless you had an emulator or the original system?

 

Those are two very difference requests, and the former would either stop the production of HD remakes, or double their price (as they would defectively have to make two new games)  It is not easy to take a ps1 game and run it on a modern PS4 architecture.

 

I would support the creation of an arcade of sorts, where you could walk around it like a museum and experience the original games as they were originally made.  I do not think it necessary, or even a good idea, to preserve those forms of entertainment for your own home.

Edited April 16, 2018 by Sir_Bee

[Sir-Syzygy]

Just now, Sir_Bee said:

 

But the original in what capacity?  Do you expect to be able to play said original on your modern machine, or do you just want a digital file that contains the original game that won't run unless you had an emulator or the original system?

 

Those are two very difference requests, and the former would either stop the production of HD remakes, or double their price (as they would defectively have to make two new games)  It is not easy to take a ps1 game and run it on a modern PS4 architecture.

I'm not requesting anything. I'm just starting a conversation. 

[Sir_Bee]

Just now, Crispy78923 said:

I'm not requesting anything. I'm just starting a conversation. 

 

sure, but I am trying to understand the point you are making.  "but I still feel that if they release a remake for a premium price, it should be a standard for the original visions to be included."  That is a 'request' in this context.

[CandiBunni]

It's a terrible shame when so many wonderful games, whether they be hidden gems or beloved classics, end up lost because of poor preservation. Obviously, however, I don't know exactly to what lengths most developers go to backing up their older titles, and there can certainly be unforeseen, outside factors which make this more difficult.

I'm immediately reminded of the story with Killzone HD. Killzone HD was an HD re-release of the original Killzone, a game which released back in 2004 for the PS2. Killzone HD was released on the PS3 both standalone and as part of the Killzone Trilogy collection. It aimed to fix many of the visual, auditory, and technical issues present in the original release, including performance, and it did exactly that. How they ended up getting access to those original files and game code in order to do a remaster in the first place, however, is pretty ridiculous. If I'm not mistaken, they ended up finding them in a shoebox in an employee's garage. That's not okay. Again, I don't know what circumstances led to it being there, but that just doesn't sound right to me.

Another, and one that hits me pretty hard, has to do with Jet Set Radio Future. Jet Set Radio Future originally released in 2002, exclusively for the Original Xbox. It was a re-imagining of the original Jet Set Radio on the Dreamcast. While the latter has since been re-released on the PS3, Xbox 360, and PC, the former has still yet to see any such treatment. Why, I'm not exactly sure. I don't know that anyone has ever been given any official reason, but there are rumours about that it's because SEGA has actually lost the original game files. If that's truly the case, it's a crying shame, because JSRF is one of my favourite games of all time, and I've been dying for an HD-release for years and years.

If you're not sure what the big deal is regarding preservation, it's pretty simple. Say I wish to play a game from my childhood, or I've discovered one from around that time, and I wish to play it. If I don't have an original copy of that game, and in some cases the original hardware, then what am I to do? If the developer/publisher has re-released it on newer consoles or PC, then sure, I can go and play it there. What if they haven't, though? What if the game isn't available on newer machines?

You might say that I could just use an emulator, but emulation isn't perfect by any means. Some emulators are difficult to set up, others are a hassle to work with for other reasons. There are plenty of games that either haven't been made available as ROMs, or ISOs, or tracking them down is extremely difficult.

 

So that just leaves buying an original copy of the game, and/or the console it was on. There are many titles that I love and adore that are greatly overpriced on sites like eBay and Amazon. Here's an example. I have an original copy of Tomba! 2: The Evil Swine Return. I still have the case, the booklet, and the disc. The disc still works, but it's scratched just enough that the music skips and cuts out regularly. If I wanted to go and buy a copy of it off of Amazon or eBay, I'd have to shell out hundreds of dollars for a copy in good condition. Not new, just working.

That is why preservation of a game's original files and code is so important. So that we don't end up with this kind of problem, or at least greatly cut down on it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

As far as remasters or remakes that respect or include the original visions, specifically your use of Halo: The Master Chief Collection, as an example, I'd have to disagree with. The reason being that Halo: Combat Evolved on the Original Xbox is both my favourite in the series, and my favourite first person shooter in general. The Anniversary version of it, like the Anniversary version of Halo 2, use the PC versions of those original titles, not the Original Xbox versions. The PC version of Halo: Combat Evolved was, visually, inferior to the OG Xbox version, due to missing many visual elements, and replacing others with inferior versions.

A few examples would be:

1. Jackal Shields and Covenant Stationary Energy Shields. In the OG Xbox version, these would smoothly change colours until eventually popping, after taking too much damage. In the PC version (and thus Anniversary version), these shields are static. They no longer possess their colour changing effect. Instead, they simply pop once they've taken too much damage.

 

2. Covenant Dropship Energy Fields. The energy fields between the prongs on Covenant Dropships (Spirits) was changed from its original visual effect to an inferior, and quite goofy looking, new effect in the PC release.

3. Green Teleporters in multiplayer. In the Original Xbox version, these teleporters possessed not only the green, foggy effect which they still possess in the PC release, but a watery, flowing effect, which was no longer present in the PC release.

Even setting those aside, there is the issue of missing sound effects in Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, both its original 2011 release, and its inclusion on the Master Chief Collection. Unlike Halo 2 Anniversary, there is no option to use the original game's sound effects. Only its music. The Anniversary sounds are not, as some would believe, simply uncompressed or sharper versions of the original effects. They are entirely new sound effects.

For whatever reason, 343 Industries and/or Certain Affinity also replaced the original sound effects with the Anniversary sound effects in the game's (Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary) multiplayer as well. A decision that absolutely boggles my mind.

 

My preferred method of re-mastering a game is as follows.

1. Increase resolution to 1080p, with support for higher resolutions if available.

2. Use the least compressed versions of the original visual and audio files.

3. Improve the framerate such that it runs at a locked 60fps, with support for higher framerates, if possible (mainly on PC).

4. Fix any technical issues from the original release.

5. Do not alter any of the original visual or audio effects other than improving resolution and clarity.

6. Do not change or remove aspects of the game that contributed positively towards the game's mood/atmosphere, even if these were mainly done due to technical limitations. An example would be the thick fog in some levels of Halo: Combat Evolved on the original Xbox. The PC, and thus Anniversary, version removed much of the fog, allowing you to see the borders of certain levels, as well as negatively impacting the mood and atmosphere of them.

Basically, improve the framerate, fix technical issues (bugs, glitches), use higher quality versions of the original assets, and bump the resolution to 1080p at minimum. That's it. That's all that I want HD re-releases to do. That's my perfect idea of an HD re-release. Too many times, developers try to do more than that, and end up ruining the original experience because of it. Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary is a perfect example of this if you ask me, which is why I bring it up so much.

Edited April 16, 2018 by CandiBunni

[Crzy Minus]

To an extend, I do believe that game remakes these days are a benefit for design improvements and an opportunity to regain interest for a new generation, but they wouldn't be necessary if the original version still holds up. In my personal opinion I rather just have a high definition remaster than a remake, but I'd also prefer the original copy as well.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Crzy Minus

[Bloodytears1666]

I guess it will go in the same direction that buildings or automotive production - some iconic and popular by masses will be held and updated by new companies, some will disappear for forever. It's still investments and if game, like Silent Hill for example, do not payback, then no one will invest to maintain it. In other side some will remain in private collections ownerships. From this point original games will never be included, as they already exists, existed.

[Sir-Syzygy]

1 hour ago, Kittet3 said:

Something I think that is missing from your perspective is that the original hardware to play these games often gives a different experience than playing with a modern controller. Playing on an arcade machine where you have to stand the entire time and playing with the Nintendo 64 controller that use to give my thumbs blisters is a lot different than playing on the better designed modern controllers. The start screen of the PS1 and PS2 and watching the circle spin and then give you the message that your disc is unreadable offers a much different experience than clicking on a digital game. 

 

I'm all for digital games being preserved in their original forms with their original hardware. Imagine a digital game museum where you can play with the old controllers and experience the games as they were. However, I disagree with the idea that remakes/remasters are preserving games. They are more like history books or art reprints- they are making the concepts accessible but they are missing key details that are important. 

 

EDIT: Also your poll is horribly biased

I agree that remakes aren't any way of preserving games, it's like saying movie remakes are preserving the originals. I find myself annoyed with those who insist remakes "preserve classics and offer them in a fresh way to new gamers", I struggle to understand that viewpoint. Glad to see you understand, sometimes I feel like I'm the crazy one. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Crispy78923

[starcrunch061]

Am I missing something here? There seems to be two separate conversations in this thread. 

 

With regards to the various media for delivering games, there is little need for preservation here. But with regards to preserving games themselves, there has been very little done in this regard. Further, I think that the remasters and whatnot have actually exacerbated the situation. It's kind of like George Lucas changing the original Star Wars to make them more "technically impressive". Ultimately, there are plenty of people who would rather have the originals, but in the most modern format.

 

In film, you have the Criterion Collection, which has done a marvelous job of making old movies available. They cost an arm and a leg, granted, but it's a specialized market. I would love for the same thing to occur for games. NES and SNES classics that have long since passed out of view would benefit immensely from such treatment. 

 

5 minutes ago, Crispy78923 said:

I agree that remakes aren't any way of preserving games, it's like saying movie remakes are preserving the originals. I find myself annoyed with those who insist remakes "preserve classics and offer them in a fresh way to new gamers", I struggle to understand that viewpoint. Glad to see you understand, sometimes I feel like I'm the crazy one. 

 

I think this could be easily fixed, if the companies simply included both the original version (possibly with some restorative clean-up, like with film) alongside the new version. Star Wars did this for the original trilogy on DVD, and it was great.

 

1 hour ago, Kittet3 said:

Something I think that is missing from your perspective is that the original hardware to play these games often gives a different experience than playing with a modern controller. Playing on an arcade machine where you have to stand the entire time and playing with the Nintendo 64 controller that use to give my thumbs blisters is a lot different than playing on the better designed modern controllers. 

 

Ah, the dream. A games museum would be positively awesome.

Edited April 16, 2018 by starcrunch061

[Sir-Syzygy]

3 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Am I missing something here? There seems to be two separate conversations in this thread. 

 

With regards to the various media for delivering games, there is little need for preservation here. But with regards to preserving games themselves, there has been very little done in this regard. Further, I think that the remasters and whatnot have actually exacerbated the situation. It's kind of like George Lucas changing the original Star Wars to make them more "technically impressive". Ultimately, there are plenty of people who would rather have the originals, but in the most modern format.

 

In film, you have the Criterion Collection, which has done a marvelous job of making old movies available. They cost an arm and a leg, granted, but it's a specialized market. I would love for the same thing to occur for games. NES and SNES classics that have long since passed out of view would benefit immensely from such treatment. 

 

 

I think this could be easily fixed, if the companies simply included both the original version (possibly with some restorative clean-up, like with film) alongside the new version. Star Wars did this for the original trilogy on DVD, and it was great.

 

 

Ah, the dream. A games museum would be positively awesome.

Your observation of there being more than one conversation speaks true. As much as I appreciate this site and its functions, I often find people can't seem to focus on the bloody topic. 

Anyway, I could not agree more with what you say about Criterion and such. 

[RadiantFlamberge]

When remastering a game, the asset quality, framerate, & fixes for technical issues (such as glitches & short draw distance) are the most important thing.  4K resolution is nice, but not if it tanks the framerate.  1080p is a good enough resolution.

Edited April 16, 2018 by gameoverDude189

[ExHaseo]

What's even worse, is that with the rise of digital only titles, more and more games are likely to disappear. With current classic games, you can still get a lot of them fairly easily. It may be expensive, but it's not especially difficult. You can just buy the game, buy an old console (or repair one if needed), and plug it in and play it. Emulation is also far more prominent for classic games than more modern ones, so it's fairly easy to play pretty much any NES/SNES/Genesis game you want. When it comes to more recent games though, that's not the case. The PS2 and Xbox emulation isn't that great, and doesn't support every game. Same with the Dreamcast. And in another 20 years, once the PS3/360 stops being supported, and the shop goes down for them, there's a lot of games to be potentially lost. Even if emulation eventually gets perfected, these older games being preserved will completely depend on people backing up the games now, and then sharing them later on. 

 

That's one of the biggest reasons I've always been against digital only. In 20-30 years, if I want to play, let's say Scott Pilgrim, I may not be able to. It's already been delisted, and if PS3 support stops, it won't be able to be redownloaded. Even if I happen to backup all the data on my PS3, what happens if there's a fire and both my computer and PS3 are destroyed? The game could be lost forever. 

 

It is incredibly sad that people don't have much foresight when it comes to gaming. People only think about the now, and publishers only care about making as much money as possible at any given moment, and will do anything to cut costs.

 

And for the point of remasters, I agree with pretty much all of your points. There are some HD ports that are a little better than their original versions (games like FFX and Kingdom Hearts come to mind), but it would be nice to have the option to have the original on the same disc. Like they did with Odin Sphere Leifthrasir. There are plenty of HD ports that aren't as good as the originals, or have been changed so much that they aren't even really the same game. .hack//G.U. Last Recode comes to mind for that second one. They completely changed so much, that while it's still a great game overall, the first two volumes are just rushed through, and it's just not the same experience as the original versions of the games.

[Beyondthegrave07]

You should be careful and don't give off the wrong idea that remakes are bad because it seems like you are okay with remakes but don't want people to substitute them for the originals and say they are the same thing. I agree 100%. They are not the same and people shouldn't act like they are. It's updating the game to appeal to a more modern audience. In the analogy with music or films, this happens all the time with song covers or remakes. The old game, movie, or film is still there. The only way to really preserve games is to either amass a collection like film or music fanatics or hope that the company itself preserves them.

 

It's not like it's not happening at all though. Square Enix rereleased every FF game on PC or IOS that plays no differently than the originals. Hell, you can get most of them on PS3, and we are seeing them coming to PS4 (At a snail's pace). Nintendo has the virtual console store and allows you to buy 20-25 year old games with the same graphics as the original. The hardware may be different, but the game is still the same.

 

Hopefully, other companies realize the importance of preserving these as well and continue to rerelease the games as hardware continues to evolve. Not everything will be preserved, but you have to at least aknowledge that SOME effort is being put into it. It's not as easy as music or film or we'd see it more often. That's why it's not as well-preserved.

[Remilia Scarlet]

4 hours ago, CandiBunni said:

I'm immediately reminded of the story with Killzone HD. Killzone HD was an HD re-release of the original Killzone, a game which released back in 2004 for the PS1.

CandiBunni, I loved your post and agree with you, but I wanted to tell you that Killzone released on PS2, not PS1 lol

Edited April 16, 2018 by Daft Gamer

[CandiBunni]

22 minutes ago, Daft Gamer said:

CandiBunni, I loved your post and agree with you, but I wanted to tell you that Killzone released on PS2, not PS1 lol

I know. That was a typo on my part. Apologies. I'll go ahead and fix it.

Edited April 16, 2018 by CandiBunni

[SnowxSakura]

3 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

Ah, the dream. A games museum would be positively awesome.

They already exist

http://www.nvmusa.org/

 

it would be impossible to preserve every game, as a lot of companies just don't exist anymore, with some not even knowing who owns the IP

Edited April 16, 2018 by SnowxSakura

[Zenpai]

This a topic that says much to me. I really hate seeing games and people's hard work lost to time, and hence why backwards compatibility is so important to me. I get that the gaming industry as a whole had to go through a lot of growing pains, but after more than 40 years of maturity, I think it's time to treat games with the kind of respect all art forms deserve.

 

It still boggles my mind how digital purchases aren't transferrable between generations. If I bought the game back on PS3, why don't I have the right to automatically use it on my PS4? There's literally no other reason than to make more money off of double dipping. I really love Sony to death for all they've done for gaming, but this is the one issue they desperately need to improve upon. Microsoft showed how it's done back at E3 2015 and is even allowing you to use your physical games on your current consoles. Granted, the compatible games need to be approved one by one, but it's still a hell of a lot better than what Sony allows us to do, which is... jack shit. No matter how good your service and your games may be, good will creates the most long lasting kind of loyalty.

 

Regarding remakes, I think they're a very good thing. They allow us to have our old experiences back while also having all the bells and whistles of modern gaming - better graphics, improved controls, more functionalities... that's not to say that I believe the old versions should be erased or something, though. A good remake should contain every single thing the original had and just improve on the technical aspects, but even so, there might always be something intangible that people just liked about the original, and hence why you should make remakes for the new gamers, or for the people that just want to re-experience their old games in a new light, but keep the original as a digital download, or better yet, as an unlockable on the disc together with the remake, as some people here have suggested.

 

Game preservation is the reason the feature I want the most out of the PS5 is backwards compatibility. I don't even really want there to be a PS5. Graphics are already more than perfectly fine on the PS4 and I already have way too may consoles hooked up to my TV. But backwards compatibility would soften that blow considerably, since that would mean I would only need one machine to play all games that have come out since the end of 2013.

 

We've reached the point where console manufacturers have finally realized that a simple, PC-like architecture will go a long way in streamlining things and making your platform accessible and easy to develop for. Microsoft has done this from the very beginning (hence why all of their consoles have backwards compatibility), but Sony had to go through the PS3 to understand that. They have now, so if the PS5 has an architecture similar to the PS4 (and everything points towards the fact that it will), there will be literally no excuse to keep backwards compatibility from us. One generation of remasters we can handle, as a lot of games were getting a bit too old by modern standards, but two in a row? Getting the same games sold to us time and time again? Enough is enough. Just give us backwards compatibility and focus on giving us new experiences.

 

BriHard spoke about this issue better than I ever could have (the titles of the video and your topic are extremely similar... was this what inspired you to write the topic in the first place?...):

 

 

[RadiantFlamberge]

It's sad that some good licensed games end up getting delisted from PSN, Xbox Live, GOG, Steam & Origin, etc. after awhile. 

Too bad publishers can't cut a non-expiring license deal for individual games.  Even if it would drive up the price of the game another $3-5, it'd be worth it.