Editing Backward compatibility (section)

===Costs===
The monetary costs of supporting old software is considered to be a large drawback to the usage of backward compatibility.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=NGen39/> The associated costs of backward compatibility are a larger [[bill of materials]] if hardware is required to support the legacy systems; increased complexity of the product that may lead to longer [[time to market]], technological hindrances, and slowing innovation; and increased expectations from users in terms of compatibility.<ref name=Belleflamme /> Furthermore, it also introduces the risk that developers will favor developing games that are compatible with both the old and new systems, since this gives them a larger base of potential buyers, resulting in a dearth of software which uses the advanced features of the new system.<ref name=NGen39/> Because of this, several console manufacturers phased out backward compatibility towards the end of the console generation in order to reduce cost and briefly reinvigorate sales before the arrival of newer hardware.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web|url=https://www.cnet.com/news/game-consoles-and-the-death-of-backward-compatibility-why-we-dont-care/|title=Game consoles and the death of backward-compatibility: Why we don't care|last=Stein|first=Scott|website=CNET|access-date=2019-11-05|archive-date=2019-09-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190929024544/https://www.cnet.com/news/game-consoles-and-the-death-of-backward-compatibility-why-we-dont-care/|url-status=live}}</ref> One such example of this approach was the [[PlayStation 3]] (PS3), where it had removed backward compatibility with PlayStation 2 (PS2) games on later systems (which includes eliminating the onboard [[Emotion Engine]] and Graphics Synthesizer hardware chips that were previously used on earlier revisions) to reduce hardware costs and improve console sales.

Despite this, it is still possible to bypass some of these hardware costs. For instance, earlier PS2 systems had the core of the original PlayStation (PS1) CPU integrated into the [[Input/output|I/O]] processor for dual-purpose use; it could act as either the main CPU in PS1 mode or it can [[Clock rate|up-clock]] itself to offload I/O in PS2 mode. The original I/O core was replaced with a [[PowerPC]]-based core in later systems to serve the same functions, emulating the same functions as the PS1 CPU core. Such an approach can backfire, however, as was the case of the [[Super Nintendo Entertainment System]] (Super NES). It opted for the more peculiar [[WDC 65C816|65C816]] CPU over the more popular 16-bit microprocessors on the basis that it would allow for easier backwards compatibility with the original [[Nintendo Entertainment System]] (NES) due to the 65C816's software compatibility with the [[MOS Technology 6502|6502]] CPU in emulation mode, but ultimately did not proved to be workable once the rest of the Super NES's architecture was designed.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://gamingreinvented.com/uncategorized/the-snes-was-supposed-to-be-backwards-compatible/|title=The SNES Was Supposed to be Backwards Compatible?|website=Gaming Reinvented|date=2015-08-10|access-date=2022-02-24|archive-date=2022-02-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220224183517/https://gamingreinvented.com/uncategorized/the-snes-was-supposed-to-be-backwards-compatible/|url-status=live}}</ref>