Why do people act like Backwards compatibility should be standard

>>384730867
Xbox One X isn't fully backward compatible. It's a per game emulation. You won't be playing Asuras Wrath probably ever.

For me personally it's just convenience and I'm poor as shit. Since new televisions don't have anything besides HDMI and Display port inputs I can't use PS2 even if I wanted too without spending money and time fucking around with adapters so I need to emulate which contrary to popular belief is far from perfect when it comes to PS2 games.

Basically they are so many unnecessary barriers to appreciating the history of the art form. You shouldn't want this as much as /vee/ likes to jerk their dicks about being a secret club.

>>384730867
>360 and Xbone
the selected titles is 200+ at this point, there are only 2 niche games you cant play.
Gauntlet dark legacy is one

NDS played Gameboy Advanced games.

>>384733454
Wasn't really counting handhelds

>>384730867
This pasta again? Last time, people already pointed out that the GBA, DS, 3DS, Xbox 360, Xbox One, and PS3 are all backwards compatable too.

>>384734717
360 and One are only compatible with select titles and only early model PS3s have it, I know none of you have Wii U's or Xbox one's so why act like it's so important just because Wii and PS2 have it?

>>384730867
>>384732453
There's currently 399 games that are backwards compatible. It'll break 400 within a week or two.

>>384735356
>360 and One are only compatible with select titles and only early model PS3s have it
Still counts
> I know none of you have Wii U's or Xbox one's
I do
>why act like it's so important
It's not super important, but it's a nice feature to have. More useful features = better, what's not to understand?

>>384735854
It eats up development time and drives up the cost for a feature that only a few people will actually use

It's an incentive for people who didn't own a previous console. I never would've touched the Vita without its PS1 and PSP support.

>>384730867
Because my PC can do it.

>>384735975
> for a feature that only a few people will actually use
Only a few people actually use their brains, but I'm glad my species decided to include it as a feature anyway.

>>384735854
>Still counts
to be fair, OP said FULLY backwards compatible consoles.

>>384730867
My $500 PC can do it. So I expect a $500 console to do it.

>>384736069
...well at least it wasn't a food analogy I guess

>sonybro desperately trying to defend his failure of a console

>>384736250
What consoles are you buying that cost $500?

>>384732280
>Contrary to popular belief
Pretty sure anyone who messes with emulators know PCSX2 is the worst thing out there.

>>384736276
Yeah man I love having backwards compatibility on the Swi-
Oh...

>>384736360
The X.B.O.X. is $500 but to humour you.
>If my $500 PC can, then a $400 console should too
Better?

the ps2. the, all the poorfags can't afford a new console plus the actual brand new games that are meant for it. they had something nice once, and losing it is devastating

>>384736595
There's a lot of things your PC can do that consoles can't, that's a dumb argument

>>384737180
What I mean is, I get full backwards compatibility+near perfect emulation on most systems. So the least I can ask consoles for is full backwards compatibility

>>384737371
A lot of consoles will have completely different architecture from their predecessors so it's pointless to drive up the cost for a feature that barely anyone will use

Forgetting early PS3 models.
Also, Xbone isn't fully backwards compatible. Per game emulation, like how the 360 was.