Jasoco said:
Maybe a Limited Edition AIO Sega System.
It would be cool to have, but no company would ever have done that... especially when in the financial trouble that Sega was in. Making stuff backwards compatible is only economically viable when the previous system was very popular, or when the cost of implementing the compatibility is very low.
For example, the PSX was extremely popular, so making the PS2 backwards compatibility made it more likely that previous PSX owners would choose the PS2 over the alternatives. Same story goes for all the Gameboy's out there. Making an adaptor to play Master System games on the Game Gear was economical because the adaptor didn't need any actual components, just enough hardware to swap some pins around. Similarly, the Power Base Converter was economical because all of the SMS abilities were already present in the Genesis, so there was very little hardware cost (although this is somewhat of a grey area, since including this hardware in the Genesis may have increased the cost by a bit...)
On the other side of things, making the Saturn play SegaCD games was completely uneconomical because not only was the SegaCD not very popular (thus, software compatibility is not hugely desired by the public), but the Saturn hardware was sufficiently different that an adaptor would have been quite expensive. The Saturn
could have been designed in such a way that compatibility would have been easier (such as including the processors), but that definitely would have made the system more expensive and complicated than it already was, and probably would have held back the power of the system (forcing the system to use a 68000 instead of one of the SH2's would have sucked, for example).
Since the Saturn was also not terribly popular, there wasn't much incentive in making the Dreamcast backwards compatible. Actually doing it might have been easier than making the Saturn backwards compatible, since they're both based on the same family of processors (I might be wrong, but I think the SH4 can actually execute SH2 instructions). Unfortunately, the complexity of the Saturn hardware would likely have made this quite difficult.
However, I still think the Saturn and 32X
should have been compatible in some form or another. They were both based on similar hardware, and since they came out close enough to compete with each other, it just made for a marketplace disaster. It would have been nice to see the Saturn able to play 32X cartridges, or possibly even 32X-CD games... I don't know if it would have saved the Saturn from it's fate, but it definitely would have helped the 32X.
Another aspect of backwards compatibility that is often ignored is the possibility of people ignoring the new capabilities of the hardware. Look at what happened with the 7800. The number of 2600's in homes vastly outnumbered the amount of 7800's in homes, so many companies (even Atari) decided that it was more economical to make 2600 games than 7800 games, since they would have a larger audience. People soon realize that they really don't need a 7800 because the majority of the games are playable on the (cheaper, and more easily available) 2600... thus, the 7800 suffers in the marketplace due to competition with it's own predecessor. It can be tricky to avoid situations like this, and the newer system has to be popular enough that you can eventually leave the older one behind. The PS2 and the GBA got it right, probably because both generations of hardware were the dominant system in their categories. Atari might have been able to avoid this by implementing some sort of "slash and burn" policy by stopping 2600 production and focusing entirely on the 7800... but this probably wouldn't have worked either since the 7800 wasn't popular enough, and Atari's influence on it's 3rd party developers was rather poor (and legally murky).
--Zero