Feature
Back to the Future: The History of Backwards Compatibility
Players now expect a new console to run their old games. For most of gaming history that was the exception, and a few early attempts to deliver it went badly wrong.
In 2017 the Xbox One began playing selected original Xbox games, and Switch owners were asking for news of a Virtual Console almost daily. Players now expect new consoles to run old games, or at least to offer some route back into a company’s catalogue.
That expectation is new. For a long time, playing a game more than a few years old was a niche habit: most players moved straight to the newest hardware and treated the last console as finished. Backwards compatibility mostly did not exist. A new console arrived, and the only way to keep playing the old library was to keep the old machine plugged in. Many players accepted that. Some early buyers were furious, though, and the history of compatibility begins with their anger.
The Atari 5200 and the angry living room
Younger players may not know how many home consoles came before the Atari Video Computer System, later called the Atari 2600, or how few of them used interchangeable cartridges. The idea caught on quickly. By 1982 “Atari” was close to a synonym for “video game” for a large share of consumers, and the VCS sat in millions of American homes. Its technology had aged badly, though, and Atari knew it needed a successor.
That successor was the Atari 5200, released late in 1982. It was far more powerful. Its Pac-Man actually looked like the arcade game, unlike the infamous blocky VCS version. It had problems from day one, its joystick among them, but the loudest came from the customers who had made Atari a household name.
Households in those years replaced cars, refrigerators and televisions only when the old ones failed. Records played on any new record player. Families who had bought a VCS one to three years earlier learned that the expensive new machine could not play the games they already owned, and much of the 5200’s launch line-up consisted of improved versions of those same games. Paying again for the same library felt absurd.
Atari’s fix was an adapter that let the 5200 run VCS cartridges. By the time it shipped, the console was already seen as a failure. The later Atari 7800 built in 2600 compatibility, but its wide release slipped to the years when the NES dominated, and by then most players had moved on. The feature is now remembered mostly through Atari’s rap-backed television commercials.
SEGA’s Power Base Converter
SEGA took compatibility seriously in an unlikely place. The Master System never truly caught on in North America, yet SEGA released the Power Base Converter for the Genesis so owners could play their Master System cartridges on the new 16-bit console. Few people had demanded it.
It was technically easy, because the Genesis contained most of a Master System. The adapter did not sell especially well, which is why it is now a sought-after collector’s item. It gave SEGA one more thing to claim that Nintendo could not.
The SNES could not play NES games
In North America the original NES dominated even harder than the VCS had, holding more than 90 percent of the market for much of its life. Families kept buying NES consoles and games after 16-bit machines reached the shelves. Brand loyalty was strong.
The Super Nintendo tested that loyalty. As with the 5200, parents did not understand why they were being asked to replace a console bought a few years earlier with one that could not play the pile of expensive cartridges already in the house. The anger was strong enough to reach television news, and some parents’ groups accused Nintendo of predatory marketing.
Nintendo had reportedly considered building NES compatibility into the SNES and dropped it because of cost. The competing 16-bit consoles had a head start, and the SNES was going to launch at a higher price even without compatibility. Nintendo released a cheaper redesigned NES instead and turned its attention to SEGA’s aggressive advertising, the opening shots of the 16-bit console war.
The controversy did not hurt Nintendo the way it had hurt Atari. Consumers were already becoming more willing to upgrade, an early sign of how the market would change.
The quiet years, and what came after
After the 16-bit war, backwards compatibility largely disappeared from the conversation. Players were busy with a fast blue hedgehog and a returning grumpy gorilla. Apart from Nintendo’s handhelds, almost no system offered compatibility, and few people asked for it. Retro collections on the consoles of that era usually sold poorly. People wanted Tomb Raider, not a Konami Classics Collection. Until the PlayStation 2, the habit was simple: a new console meant a new stack of games.
That has changed completely. Older games now matter so much to players that if the platform holders will not offer a way to play them, some players will find one themselves, legal or not. Old games no longer fade away.
Remember how recent that is. For most of the medium’s history, the past stayed in the past, and the people who wanted it back were either ignored or told to keep their old console in a cupboard.
Questions readers ask
Is the SNES backwards compatible with NES games?
No. The Super Nintendo cannot play NES cartridges. Nintendo reportedly considered compatibility but dropped it because of the extra cost, and released a cheaper redesigned NES instead.
Could the SEGA Genesis play Master System games?
Yes, with the Power Base Converter. The adapter plugged into the Genesis and ran Master System cartridges, which was easy because the Genesis contained most of a Master System inside.
Was the Atari 5200 backwards compatible with the Atari 2600?
Not out of the box. Atari released an adapter for 2600 cartridges, but it arrived after the 5200 was already considered a flop.