Frank and Ben of Arstechnica recently had an online debate regarding the importance of backwards compatibility for this generation of game consoles. Frank played the affirmative while Ben played the negative. Both men raised good points on the matter, citing nice examples to back up their solid arguments.

Frank opened the debate by saying that more than anything else, backwards compatibility is a very big bonus to gamers. He cited the negative press surrounding the PS3's woes regarding the matter. News broke out last week that the European version of the PS3 carries new hardware specs but will have limited compatibility with PlayStation and PlayStation 2 games. Frank said that for the prices that the PS3 commands, Sony ought to dish out more value to the end users.

He said that owners of this generation's consoles who did not have the predecessor to their machine will eventually feel the need to play legacy titles of the old console. He also said that old games help make the long wait for big releases more bearable. He indicated too that backwards compatibility can be beneficial to the economy of the game community, saying "not only does it help to increase the library of a console, but it also helps to push old content for which the sales had long since dried up."

For his part, Ben said that the issue on backwards compatibility is a silly one and should die out in time, citing the time when Team Xbox got a lot of heat when they announced their plans for 360 backward compatibility, but the buzz died down and now, most of the haters don't even want to talk about the subject.

The truth is, Ben says, is that "I buy new consoles to be able to play new games; the ability for that console to play older games is a distant second." He also said that if gamers want to play old games, getting an old system shouldn't cost a lot and isn't really hard to do.

The two men then went on to try to debunk each other's logic, but ultimately everything boiled down to examples set in the premise involving end users.

The debate could have gone on and on, but at the end of the day, we say that the individual gaming habits of gamers will decide it. For our part, we say that backwards compatibility is a very important plus for consoles. Sure, it may not be remotely close to being the be-all and end-all when considering which console to get, but it does sweeten the deal significantly.

In the perspective of a gamer, Frank established a good point when he talked about wanting to play classic games from the console that you never had. What he didn't discuss is what about those of us who did own the old system and are planning to or are already owning the new one?

We say that there's such a thing as games that never really get old for us. There will always be that handful of games that you'll never really be over with no matter how many times you've played through it. There will always be a time for fans when they would want another run with Cloud and the gang. There will always be Final Fantasy VII, fighting game fans who will crave the button-slapping madness of Marvel Versus Capcom 2, heck I even get visions of Dig Dug sometimes! Bottomline, it's virtually impossible not to miss old favorites and for that purpose, backwards compatibility is very handy.

Sure, we can always get the old machine and be perfectly happy playing the old stuff, but it just costs a bit more than most people would assume and it's really a hassle when you think about it. Sure, we can all get refurbished gear and spend a hundred bucks or less, but why spend that money and have to exert effort to go out and buy it if you already have backwards compatibility? That money could gave been better spent on a new game or two. If you get an old system, you'll also end up having to set it up again and find space to accommodate it. Not the case with backwards compatibility.

In the end, the question is why go through all the trouble when you want to play an old game when you can just pop it in to your new system? You decide.