@TaranVH: Because additional media is added the the project to keep up with new requirements and the new media has been captured with modern equipment and requires new CODEC support that older versions of Premiere Pro doesn't support.

One shouldn't have to do what you're suggesting if Adobe were user-centric and actually put us users first and did the hard work to ensure backwards compatibility. We, as users shouldn't have to do the work for Adobe. They should do the work for us by keeping backwards compatibility. We are, after all, the ones that pay for their software. To expect us to do extra work that costs us money on top of this is not right (it costs us users time and money when we perform workarounds).

@andreas For archival purposes, it might be best for you to NOT just have the exported video file. Instead, separate it into layers - one video export will be A-roll, another will be B-roll, and another will be graphics. You'd want minimal compression. Personally, I'd use 10-bit cineform with alpha for this (though I think it does tend to make gradients look banded.)
At the same time, export a multi-track audio or .ts file, with dialogue on its own track(s), sound effects on its own track, and music on its own track.
Obviously, this would require more labor, but it makes your content 100% future-proof. Now, no matter what NLE you are using, no matter what year or version, you will easily be able to re-cut an old episode. Even if cineform is no longer supported by any NLE in the future, you will surely be able to transcode it with a program like handbrake or something.
You can even build new episodes with this process in mind - always keeping all your music confined to specific audio tracks.
Personally, we even keep ALL of our original assets, like B-roll shots, uncompressed. So if we ever need to use a shot again, it's easy for me to go back to that project, open the B-roll folder, find the shot, and use it in another video. But I doubt you have 2 petabytes of storage like we do...

@andreas But you didn't need those codecs and plugins when those projects were originally created. So why would you need them now?
Every time you update an older project, I certainly hope you are still saving your older .prproj file. You never know what adobe might choose to remove.
The absolute best solution for you will be to keep an older copy of Premiere, for use with those older projects... which is why it's so important that Adobe should keep them available... which they have not done: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2413891
So you better download the version(s) that you'll need, right NOW. And back it up somewhere.

No, it's not fine to replace it even if there is an alternative because not having the legacy titler will break a lot of projects, projects that, in my case, are constantly evolving, for example, (educational videos tend to do that) and hence constantly need to be revisited to update material. Sometimes I have to update a video that's several years old. I've already had a lot of issues with Adobe deprecating effects to find that these projects are broken. Deprecating and removing features will break backwards compatibility is not a good thing. I'm already spending way too much time finding alternative solutions to issues forced upon me by Adobe when I should be doing more productive and creative work and not patching issues brought upon us users by Adobe making decisions that don't serve the users but them. It's selfish and not very user-centric.

P.S. Suggesting one can just install an older version of Premiere Pro to work on older projects is not the answer for many reasons, e.g., a) depending on the age of the project, there may be drastic user interface changes between Premiere versions that interferes with workflow, b) the older version may not support the modern CODECs and/or plugins that may be needed to be used by the old project.

It's also worth noting that Essential Graphics turns the timeline red, and is very slow to load and render.
I'm currently rendering 4K on my top-of-the-line machine:
Intel Core i7-6950X CPU @ 3.00GHz 3.00GHz
64.0 GB RAM
Titan X (Generation 9)
And it's taking 3 seconds to render a single frame. https://i.imgur.com/JGajDZT.png

Had I used the legacy titler instead, this would be done rendering by now.

I know this is already under review, but just wanted to put some things out here.

Once the new tools have *all* the functionality & quality of the legacy one, then it might be fine. But right now, many things are missing in the new one.

- Can't nudge text or graphics around pixel-by-pixel with the arrow keys and shift+arrow keys like you can in Legacy (and these keys are assignable in the Keyboard Shortcuts for Legacy... by it having a separate window, which is great in itself, it allows separate keyboard shortcuts that would conflict with the new tool being in the program monitor.)

- the new titles are not as sharp as Legacy and the anti-aliasing is not as good. https://prnt.sc/kfwqhm

- Legacy tool creates a reference in the project bin and alt+dragging on timeline copies and creates a new copy in the project bin. Perfect for diverse workflows.

- Path Type Tool? Rounded rectangles? Holding down shift to draw perfect horiz/vert/45 degree lines? Line cap type? Join type? Miter Limit? Distortion?

- Fill types (4-color Gradient, Bevel, Eliminate, Ghost)? Sheen? Texture?

- Proper fills and shadows on open Pen shapes? (Legacy does it correct; new tool closes the shadow on open Beziers: https://prntscr.com/kfwp4n)

- Inner and outer strokes?

- Create the perfect style (drop-shadow, fill, o̶u̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶s̶t̶r̶o̶k̶e̶ (oops not possible in new tool)) on a bezier shape in new tool and want to put it on some text? Nope. In Legacy, just save it as a style and apply to anything.

Speaking of Beziers... legacy allows you to quickly convert lines from open bezier to closed or filled. New tool-- once closed, cannot be made an open bezier again. Legacy-- double-clicking a bezier goes into edit mode. New tool you have to manually switch to the pen first.

Last, legacy works well with older and shared projects. New tool... often get errors and incompatibilities. http://prntscr.com/kfwtw5

We need this feature to stay! I like having the separate window and it is really quick to use. Really great feature, would HATE to see it go.

OK Adobe, your paying customers have spoken totally in favor of keeping the Legacy Title tool. Therefore will you publicly commit now, to those who pay for your services, to those who you say you value (your customers), that you WILL KEEP the Legacy Title tool?

I mostly like the Legacy Titler for the nice separate window that it opens in which allows you to cleanly do all the titling and then close it when you're finished. Whereas the way the Essential Graphics titling works is too "messy" by comparison, in my opinion. It opens a panel into the workspace instead, which makes it a little more messy to open and close. And you have to do all the titling in the program monitor, which you might often have to re-size or scroll around in, etc, while bouncing back and forth to the Essential Graphics window in your workspace, which doesn't fit into my normal workspace setup, etc.. basically, it's just a lot less nice to work with. Whereas the Legacy Titler is nice and clean... opens when you need it, do all the work in that window, then close it when you're done. Simple and efficient.

I wouldn't mind keeping or killing it.
I'm just here to say that in case you decide to keep the Legacy Title creator, please do not get rid of the new titling tool. I love it! It has made my life so easier, thank you for it!

"Text ***** control! "
That's odd, it looks like uservoice censored the word " s I a n t ." I had no idea that was a naughty word. :P

I must agree. I'd absolutely hate to lost the legacy titler tool. Even as a very advanced user, I use it every day. It's simple. Effective. Quick and dirty.

The legacy titler tool is basically a WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) raster-based tool... like having a better version of MS Paint right inside of Premiere.
Essential graphics is basically a vector-based tool. You can do a lot of cool stuff with it, but there is a lot to learn and keep track of, a lot of ways for it to go wrong, and even a lot that is still (AFAIK) missing:
Gradients!
Underline?
Text ***** control!
Small caps size control!
Rounded rectangles with X and Y distortion and fillet size adjustments
Multiple inner and outer strokes
Title styles to instantly change font/color/stroke/etc
The PEN TOOL!!
The list goes on.

The legacy titler tool is like an axe. The axe head might be a little loose, (it's still a bit buggy) but it gets the job done when you just need to hack off a few branches.

Don't force your users to use a chainsaw, when they just want to use an axe.

@Joel Ferland You can make clip layers to insert your logos in the same way using Graphics > Rolls. Then you can position them wherever you want within the Roll and they will roll right along with the rest of of your text/shape layers in the same roll. You can make your program monitor bigger by just clicking and dragging the panel edges out. Or make it full screen by pressing "~" (without the quotes) and toggle back to your regular workspace using the same key whenever you want.

In the Legacy Titler, it's possible to insert graphic logos right in the middle of text in a rolling title. This is a must! Also, the working window is larger than the little tiny program window.

Agree. Needed for old projects and, quite frankly, the new tool is terrible.

+1 for not removing the legacy title tool! I'm a professional user and the Title tool (legacy) allows me to work WAY faster than the essential graphics style of implementing titles. I'm a huge fan of the Legacy title tool!

Another reason to keep the Legacy Title tool - we have some custom software that generates large numbers of caption .prtl files from a text document. These can then be imported into Premiere and laid into place. This workflow saves us hours of manually copy/pasting on-screen text. We have tried to implement the workflow by generating XML files containing Essential Graphic titles, but the formatting of the Essential Graphics within an XML is not intuitive. If someone can explain how Essential Graphics are formatted within XMLs then we'd have less need for the Legacy Title Tool, but right now it's essential for our workflow.

Sure! DO NOT eliminate the Legacy Title Creator.

The Legacy title editor is VERY IMPORTANT to edit and change older projects for my clients!!!

Hi James Strawn.....Just so you know. I dont have After Effects, and I am terrified of the painful learning curve that will come with it. Aside from my wish that Adobe keeps Legacy Title. Another problem that Adobe has is that there is almost zero space in the room (that's a metaphor) for beginners or know-nothings like me. Everything Adobe creates is done with the cultural assumption that everyone who uses any CC product (or at least Lr, Pr, Ps, Ae) is an experienced EXPERT who never faced a learning curve of any sort. "They were just born that way, knowing all the tricks of Adobe CC anything!!" (That's another metaphor). I have watched so many videos of Adobe just wizzing right through the toughest of creations in seconds. Then when I try, there is either a missing component, or a trick to make some box of options appear, or God forbid you hit the wrong button and the entire screen changes, but there is no "back" button for moments like that. I am a pretty intelligent person, but these types of issues have plagued my Adobe experience. And don't get me wrong. I love what I get from Adobe and I love what I am able to create. BUT--If you only knew the ideas in my mind, and how I absolutely cannot get them into creative existence because I don't have the mastery that Adobe seems to think everybody comes to CC with in the first place. And Adobe doesn't offer "Useable" phone support the way Apple or Canon do. Yes I know I can call, but if you have ever seen one of your less-than-expert CC friends call the support line and experience the interaction with the support staff, then you know full well how painful it is. Not just the language barrier, but the inability of those folks to actually show you how to do anything. Adobe is worth $121 Billion. I think a great investment of just a smidgen of all that cash (after all, how many private horse riding lessons can an exec possibly buy for their kids?) would be to have staff that can teach users like me how to do stuff, and come on the computer the exact way Apple does. Anyway, rant over. And thank you for reading what I have written.......

I miss:
Custom shapes
4 color gradient
sheen
multiple strokes (mainly outer)
Distort
Text along a path