Next-Gen Xbox To Lack Backwards Compatibility? 842
An anonymous reader writes "Biz news site Gamesindustry.biz is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox 2 won't be backward compatible with games for the current Xbox, and quoting 'sources close to Microsoft's senior Xbox executives' explaining some of the thinking behind the decision. All very cloak and dagger, although I guess whoever told them would probably be in line for a firing if they found out... So, is Microsoft right or wrong on this one? Have any Slashdot readers ever actually used the backwards compatibility on their PlayStation 2?"
one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is also coming from the company that did consumer research that found their controller was superior. I am apparently one of the 10% of people that thought that the PS2's backwards compatibility was important, apparently one of the small minority of people that believed the XBox controller to be clunky and uncomfortable (in fact caused serious cramping after short use), and that small group that seriously believes that part of the reason that MS has dominated the market place on the PC side was for backward compatibility with their products.
MS is changing the architecture, the design, and the graphics chip (ATI, no HD, and non-Intel) which will obviously force emulation (which, according to the article, was being planned) but I would think it would be far more worth it just for a base of titles. I believe the PS2 did *so* well because of the large base of titles that came from the PS1 and I can't imagine that the XB2 will be debuting with any base if they don't have backwards compatibility.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Funny)
bummer.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Interesting)
Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new. I remember the arguments when XBox first came out: "Well, I could get an XBox but it has *no* games! What am I going to do, play Halo for the next two years waiting for real games?"
Of course, it turns out that most of my friends *do* solely play Halo... :P
For XBox Next it's a matter of the lesser of two evils: do we cut out the possibility for hacks (Linux) or do we cut out our feet off *again* by having a virtually non-existant game library? Of course, with the massive changes to the hardware that are coming backwards compatibility would have an extremely high price anyway.
Have there been any consoles other than PS2 that offered backwards compatibility?
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe Micro$oft is trying to prevent a si
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Interesting)
With the GameCube, I can imagine that moving from cartridge to optical disk meant two separate reading mechanisms, which would've made it too expensive. Bu
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Interesting)
I know at least 4 other people in a similar situation
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:4, Insightful)
Add-ons have been made for several consoles to allow for backwards compatibility, including the Genesis->SMS.
Of course, it's a bit of a gamble. The GBA probably wouldn't have done nearly so well if it hadn't kept GB compatibility, nor would the PS2 have had nearly as much initial demand without it, but it certainly didn't do much to save the 7800.
Come to think of it, the 7800 and the XBOX are remarkably similar in one other respect - both had atrocious controllers.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Tekken, Rayman, Final Fantasy, and a some other titles are still frequently used in my PS-2.
"Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new."
-No. Not 'only'. It also helps when the developer creates the SAME game for the new console. With maybe a few more lens flares. Well. Lens flares have never made a game good and seldom better.
If what you say should be true we would have to relay on the developers to release the same games over and over or almost the same games, just a bit better, AND we would have to be stupid enough to buy them over and over.
I see it as more or less having to replace me CD collection every 4-5 years. Which is just no-no.
It's been this way with Windows and Office too, but lately it seems like it is going to stop. Or.. Maybe MS will add some lens flares to the Office Helper
Best $20 ever (Score:5, Insightful)
Backward compatability is awesome beacuse, quite frankly, with my NES, SNES, n64, and PS2, i am running out of space and outlets around my tv
And some people might say 'ditch the old systems' but I can tell you that, on more then one occasion, my buddies and i have consumed a case of beer and a friday evening reveling in the glory of blades of steel and no newfangledshinyassxbox2 is going to convince me that it isn't an awesome game
backwards compatible consoles other than PS2 (Score:4, Informative)
Genesis (played Master System games, with attachment that cost as much as a master system)
Game Boy Pocket/Color/Advance
Game Gear (played Master System games, with cheap attachment)
Nomad (played Genesis games)
N64 (played SNES / NES games, with 3rd party attachment)
Turbo Duo (Played normal TurboGraphix 16 and CD games)
Turbo Express Portable (played normal TG16 games)
It doesn't look like there have been enough backwards-compatible systems to say whether or not it is a blessing or a curse to system sales. It is true that the backwards compatibility of the Genesis saddled it with using the Z80 as a sound processor, which created that trademark Genesis thuddy, explody sound. Backwards compatibility in the PS2 added greatly to the complexity of programming for it, but it looks like it was the right move for the system. The Game Boy has always been helped by backwards compatibility, though the great simplicity of the system makes this less of a chore. As few people (on these shores) had a Turbo Graphix or a Sega Master System, the benefits of backwards compatibility on the Genesis and the Duo was minimal.
The moral of the story seems to be if you have a successful system, make it backwards compatible. Is the XBox successful enough to warrant that tradeoff?
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Interesting)
The main reason to switch to the PowerPC was the "computer on a chip" tech that makes building them MUCH cheaper. Rumor has it that Sony and Microsoft may even use the same multi-core chip (and Nintendo a similar one). Not that it matters much - the GPU(s) is going to matter more for polygon count.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Would it be that difficult/expensive to put two processors in the box and have the boot loader figure out what processor to hand control over to when reading the CD? By the time this XBox ships, the CPU in the original XBox could hardly be that expensive, compared to the cost of the other components, or is there enough difference between the chips that this would be too hard/expensive?
Seems like lack of backward compatibility is one of those things that causes people to
YOU'RE RIGHT ... IT'S THE BYTECODE THAT LIMITS (Score:3, Informative)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Informative)
What is said by microsoft that the G5 lacks is the ability to do it in a context (that is, live switching). However, I do not quite believe this is true.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Blech! I'll just keep my little gamecube.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
This will cause some consumer backlash, however. Maybe it will affect sales, maybe it won't.... Since when has the game (or PC, for that matter) market been directed by technical truth rather than marketing FUD?
Hey! Now there is poetic justice! Good luck, BillyBoy!
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:4, Insightful)
OS/2 seems to be a pretty poor example, as it was capable of running most legacy DOS software and 16-bit Windows software as well as, if not better than, Microsoft's original operating systems.
It was only when development began for Win95 and NT's 32-bit codebases -- which differed from what came before and from OS/2 -- that OS/2 began to lose marketshare.
OS/2 failed because of a lack of lateral compatibility, not backward.
Re:It's just a bloody name (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think ANYONE expected backwards compatibility, and it hasn't really been an industry standard. Playstation/Playstation 2 was THE major exception in U.S. console gaming.
Nintendo has actually made it a business model to resell and repackage old games. Super Mario Bros. for the NES has been re-released a number of times for many systems, including the SNES and the Game Boy Advance/SP. Names are used for branding. People will associate it with something... whether it be cool graphics, Halo, XBox Live, etc. Name association may mean backwards compatibility to some, but only if you started playing during the Playstation era.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Interesting)
I imagine they backed themselves into a hole by going with an Nvidia chipset. They don't own licences to emulate all of Nvidia's shader stuff on ATI hardware, so they do a "study" showing how it doesn't matter. Sony on the other had has licenced (or cross-licenced) pretty much everything in the PS2.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Funny)
Second, I definitely agree with you, that they've backed themselves into a hole in more than one way. They've decided to change the entire architecture of the system, removing HDDs, going for a different chipset etc. It will be next to impossible for them to get the licenses and then make the thing emulate in time for release.
Third, backwards compatibility was a huge advantage for the PS2 when it came to the market. It meant that people could buy their console and go home and play some excellent games from the PS1 instead of being forced to suffer through some of those horrendous launch titles. Having the backwards compatibility simply adds more value to the purchase.
Looks like Microsoft made some bad decisions here. Surprise, surprise!
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you talking about the original controller? If so then I think it's safe to say the majority of gamers (read as: humans with human-sized hands) agree it was a POS, but the scaled down s-controller is perfectly comfortable.
In my experience, having lived with 5 roomates with varying console preferences and having both a PS2 and an Xbox on the same communal tv, the PS2 users cause their hands to cramp up using the xbox because they insist on keeping their fingers in the L1L2 R1R2 positions when those buttons don't exist on the xbox controller. If you relax your hands and approach it as a different controller - not as a poorly designed PS2 contoller - then there shouldn't be any trouble at all.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Xbox vs. Playstation 1 (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah me too, funny that... (Score:5, Insightful)
If I had an XBox, I wouldn't want to have two devices milling about in my entertainment center, especially two devices the size of XBoxes. And then, on down the line, will Live be an Xbox2 only service? If so what happens to everyone who likes playing the original Halo online?
Funnily enough MS seems to think it can afford to do research that supports what it wants to believe is true. I guess technically they -can- afford to, but not if they want to make money on any future ventures. It's a company wide problem from what I can see that needs to be solved.
And yeah the XBox default controllers are huge [penny-arcade.com].
Re:Yeah me too, funny that... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's also interesting that there's been a lot of recent discussion about the problems people have playing classic games on new PCs: for example, Tomb Raider, the original is a great game but it's hard (I hear) to get playing on a new PC. I love the fact I can just pop the game in my PS2 and play it, and without the disadvantages of keeping the old console around.
Plus, you know, things break. I really hope the PS3 has PS2 and PS1 emulation so I can continue to play all my games, even the old one, with one console. Without this support, even if you can keep the old consoles around they eventually break and it's not the same as if there is current support for the platform.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Insightful)
Err... how can you "emulate" a hard drive, if you don't have one?
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Funny)
"cpu not detected. using software emulation"
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Funny)
Oh come on, maybe after you had just finished a furious round of masterbating. We all know it wasn't great, but this is just bullshit. I played Halo for days straight as did most of my friends and never had an issue. If you are this frail, perhaps you should forget about gaming altogether.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Insightful)
I bet they asked people who already owned the system. Of course there not interested because its there...Lets see how they react when you offer to take it away.
I think this is one of those surveys whose wording can sway the target audience.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:5, Funny)
It's by far the most ergonomical of all controllers.
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the thing I like most about the 'Cube controller. You always know which button your thumb is on, and you can always find whichever button you want from there. If you have large thumbs it'll be quite easy to press more than one at a time, but I don't get that often, and usually it doesn't matter when I do.
I find it difficult to remember which button is where on the PS2, causing problems when I first start to play a game, I
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Insightful)
Except for the "z" button. I have often found myself playing a game, thinking to myself "How the hell did I do that before?", playing with the real buttons for awhile, moving back and forth between areas to see if there was something else I missed, and then I remember there's that tiny shoulder-esque button that's hard to either see or feel if
Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Used it? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Used it? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Used it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Used it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Think that little tidbit of info will affect whether or not you buy a PS3?
Re:Used it? (Score:4, Insightful)
I for one would be VASTLY more likely to buy a PS3 if it means I can play all the PS1 and PS2 titles as well.
-
One PS1 Game to Rule Them All... (Score:3, Insightful)
Reason alone to use the PS2's backwards compatability.
Re:Used it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Never having had a PS1, backwards compatibility on the PS2 was a big deal for me, it was like getting two systems in one. I don't have an x-box, and I'm not likely to get the next one of that line either but the ability to play a bargain-bin Panzer Dragoon Orta or Halo certainly would be appealing.
Game Boy has been the best example of backwards compatibility; the fanciest GBA SP of today and even the dual-screened Gameboy of the future will still play the original circa-1988 games. Granted, the Game Boy evolved in small increments, but apart from HDTV resolution and more megahertz, what's the next x-box going to do that the current one doesn't?
Even for folks that don't actually take advantage of a system's backwards compatibility, it's a strong selling point. The device seems more universal. AMD's x86-64 is cool for some of the same reasons. It's the new hotness, but the old and busted stuff still works on it.
Re:Used it? (Score:4, Interesting)
I noticed when purchasing the DVD Remote, it "upgraded" the DVD software by placing a new version on the memory card, but have yet to find something what "updates" the PS1 emulator/driver.
I started picking up some oldie, but goodie, games that I can't even play due to not owning a PS1 anymore. Those include the afore mentioned Castlevania, various Mega Mans and MK Trilogy.
Any thoughts?
Bad Move for MS (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought this quote from the article summed it up nicely. How many people, do you think, held out for the ps2 over the dreamcast because of backwards compatibility?
I wonder if this was the real reason that they dropped the backward compatibility:
Re:Bad Move for MS (Score:5, Funny)
Well I dunno (Score:5, Insightful)
Atari 2600: First gen.
NES: First gen.
SNES: Planned to be backward compatible, not implemented in release.
N64: Not backward compatible.
Gamecube: Not backward compatible.
SMS: First gen.
Genesis: Not backward compatible.
PS1: First gen.
PS2: Backward compatible.
That's all of the most successful consoles I can think of. Of those, only ONE was backward compatible. Even most of the lesser consoles were not compatible with anything else.
Saturn: Not backward compatible.
Dreamcast: Not backward compatible.
Neo Geo: First (and only) gen.
Jaguar: Not backward compatible.
Now maybe backward compatibility is now huge, amybe now that Sony has started it, it is the one thing that no one will live without. That, however, remains unproven. History indicates that non-backward compatible consoles can be successful. Current evidence seems to support this too. Despite competition from the PS2 and X-box, and lots of raging on graphics quality, the GameCube has done quite well for itself.
Re:Well I dunno (Score:4, Informative)
Genesis: Not backward compatible.
Actually, there was an adapter that you could buy to make the Genesis backwards compatible. It isn't exactly the same thing as out of the box backwards compatibility, but I don't recall the adapter being very expensive.
Re:Well I dunno (Score:5, Informative)
But the third one is the most popular series of "consoles" of all time and the grandaddy of all backwards-compatibility: the Game Boy. The GBA and the GB Player for the GameCube can play almost all Game Boy games going back to 1989. Pretty impressive, and a huge selling point, IMHO. I think Sony is modeling their console plans on Nintendo's handheld strategy - and it works. I play PS1 and PS2 games on my PS2 regularly. Now if Nintendo can follow that course for the GC's successor...
To get back to the Xbox, however: I believe that Xbox Next will be fundamentally flawed if it does not allow backwards-compatibility. I don't currently own an Xbox, but if there were a few games I had to have on a Xbox Next, I might buy one of those if I could pick up the three or four Xbox games I want. However, if I can't go backwards... then there is nothing that could compel me to buy either the Xbox or the Xbox Next... except for Shenmue III (if it ever happens).
Re:Well I dunno (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well I dunno (Score:4, Insightful)
The other factor, I believe is the disc based format. Speaking only of Nintendo (I'm not familiar with the others), they kept cartridge based consoles right up to the Gamecube. Those are seen more of as hardware rather than software, and people don't expect as stringent compatibility reqirements with those. However, discs are a different issue. Most mainstream discs (CDs, DVDs) are backwards compatible with newer players. CDs can be played in DVD players, for example. The new DVD standard (Blue-Ray or HD-DVD) groups all have hardware backwards compatibility on their priority lists.
As such, I think a lot of XBOX customers are going to be dissapointed with this move. I didn't own a PS1, but baught a PS2 because they did a quality job with backwards compatibility, leaning me to trust them. I don't own an XBOX, and am not likely to pick up an XBOX Next if they don't demonstrate any reason for my doing so. Sony, for instance, won't obsolete my game library investment, but Microsoft wants to do exactly that. Why should I give Microsoft my money then, if they won't value what I have given them?
Microsoft is making a huge mistake, here's why (Score:3, Insightful)
GameBoy! (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe twice in the last two years... (Score:3, Insightful)
Foot, meet bullet (Score:3, Insightful)
Have we ever used the backwards compatibility on the PS2? Does a bear crap in the woods? (For the sarcasm impaired, that's "yes".)
I've got a collection of about 60 PSOne disks, from "Resident Evil" through "Final Fantasy" looping into "Dance Dance Revolution" and plenty of others I haven't even gotten to yet. And I've got quite a few PS2 games as well (and to be fair, naturally I have a Gamecube and Xbox).
I'll be honest: I think the Xbox 2 has shot themselves in the foot, because now it's not a 3 way battle, it's a 4 way battle between the Gamecube, PS2, Xbox, and Xbox2.
Sony made a brilliant move when they made the PS2 backwards compatible, and have stated they plan to have PSOne games all they way until 2008 (as I seem to recall). People who are cheap can still get a PSOne for about $79-$100, and games for around $20-$30 (infrequently, but it still happens even today). Sony gets a cut off of those games.
Now, you look at the PS2. If you want just one PS2 game, the choice is pretty damned easy: no additional space needed in your room, same connectors even! Just junk that old PSOne and go PS2, and you can play all your old games and those "few" PS2 games you're thinking about. And once you're in, over the years it gets harder to go back to the old stuff.
With the Xbox, that choice is no longer there. I have Xbox games I like (though to be honest, I've never gotten into Halo. Go figure.). Now when the Xbox2 comes out, I'm going to be looking at it and say "Well, I could buy it now for that 1 game I must have, but eh - I'll wait until they build up a library that I care about."
Yes, there will be "must have" games upon launch, but if comes down to space (already at a premium with 3 consoles), or cost (another $299 for one or two games), people will look at the backwards compatible PS3 (and, if the rumors of the Gamecube 2 or whatever are correct) with a lot more favor.
Granted, in the past there was no backwards compatibility (NES -> SNES -> N64), but the game market has learned a valuable lesson.
There will be Xbox 2 games that I'll want eventually that will make it worth the purchase price, but I'm willing to bet that initial sales will be "electronics enthusiasts only" until a larger library gets built up.
As the article mentions, it will certainly eat into the "First Mover" advantage the Xbox Next is hoping to gain. Even when the PS2 came out, there were still good upcoming PSOne games to look forward to. So unless Microsoft does what they usually do and remove all Xbox One games from the shelves (example: when Office XP comes to stores, Office 2000 becomes impossible to find, etc), or keeping Live out of the hands of anyone but Xbox Next owners, they'll find the current base slow to pick up.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
Re:Foot, meet bullet (Score:5, Insightful)
Backwards compatibility is nice, but not if it compromises the new features of the machine.
I'd rather have a cutting edge console than something that'd been watered down so it can still run old stuff.
There were a lot of disgruntled PS2 early adopters who found its low-res graphics (an artifact from PSX days) to be less-than-impressive. In fact, the first run of games didn't exactly blow away the PSX versions. There was also much ado about the handful of PSX games that were incompatible. It gave them an early black eye.
I'll buy an Xbox 2 for the same reason I've bought any other console: It has some kick-ass games that i want to play. If all it had going for it was compatibility (ie; PS2 for the first year), it'll sit on the shelves.
Compatibility is nice, but not a selling point by itself.
Re:Foot, meet bullet (Score:3, Insightful)
Once the X-Box drops below $100 I might consider it. It's going to be a tough sell though. Right now there are only 5 or 6 X-Box exclusives th
Re:Foot, meet bullet (Score:3, Insightful)
Electronics don't live forever. They die. My PS1 lost the baring in the cd tray so it needs to have tape to hold the cd down. And it's now not loading some games because the electric motor on the cd player is going. i'm glad I have a PS2 to play my libraary of PS1 games.
If Xbox has good launch games, it will sell because gamers want to play games and many want to be "first on the block."
For this, MS has to convi
Use PS2 Backward Compatability? Absolutely! (Score:5, Informative)
Backward compatability was and still is a huge selling point for the Playstation 2.
-- Rick
That sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
Then again, perhaps you believe that all those researchers and folk at Microsoft waking up one day and going "Gee.. if only people could put their PC's in the *living room!*" as
Thats it.... (Score:4, Funny)
Total BS (Score:3, Informative)
Amazing (Score:4, Informative)
Duuhhh... (Score:5, Funny)
3. Profit!
More speculation (Score:3, Insightful)
It was actually widely speculated that Xbox would play Dreamcast games. Some asshat at $TOP_GAMER_NEWZ_SITE noticed that MSFT and Sega were working together, and jumped to a huge conclusion. Of course, they were working to hammer out marketing deals for Sega games on the Xbox platform.
Blah. Wait for official word, I hate speculation.
It'll probably be compatible. Or else it won't be called Xbox at all, they'd abandon and start a whole new "brand". But with Xbox just starting to pick up a good head of steam, they'd be foolish to kill compatibility on any "Xbox 2" at this point.
So it could be a PS2-PSX thing, or a SNES-N64 thing. Who knows.
Re:More speculation (Score:3, Insightful)
it would be foolish on some levels but they just might think it's still the better business move(who knows what sacrifices they would have to do to get the games running on not only different archicture cpu but with different graphics chip manufacturer as well, think of the shaders and such).
Re:More speculation (Score:4, Interesting)
The idea is to get away from moving parts that keep costs up. Flash memory has just about all the desireable features of a disk - except rewrite lifespan. Flash is faster and follows semiconductor economies of scale (gets cheaper, like chips; not bigger like discs). It just can't be used for swap space and you can count the number of titles that use it for that on one hand.
(the frequent rewrites of swap usage would burn through flash memory so fast consumers would sue)
But there's no reason they can't have the huge save games, custom soundtracks and downloadable content.
And if they allow the neXtBox to access songs/video from a network share/feed, I'll be its number 1 fan even without backwards compat.
Hell, no other the only other 'under the tv' console had backwards compat, and they did fine. Backwards compat would kick ass, but I sincerely doubt it's a deal-breaker for a significant portion of gamers. I mean... it's not like the XBox itself was backwards compatible with anything.
If it has the games, the gamers will follow.
Hmm. (Score:3, Interesting)
If Sony keeps the compatibility going, I don't see MS displacing them any time soon.
You gotta be fucking shittin me.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Um yeah who the hell doesn't?! I play all my PS1 games on my PS2 and look forward to playing my PS2-PS1 games on my PS3 when it comes out. As much as i'd hate to see the Xbox go the Nintendo route and fuck over their consumer base I think MS should....
The reason is the Xbox is great, but it's so freeking easy to pirate the games on it, and I understand if they want to make it more secure/proprietary. As it is now, you put your mod chip in and a larger drive, flash the bios and install the new dashboard and from then on any game you rent you simply hit "copy to hard drive" and its yours. You NEVER buy games...EVER...
With the PS2 yeah you can mod it to play burned copies, but then you got to fuck with your burner software and be picky about your cd media. Also the mod chip for the PS2 is a solder only and not a "stick and screw" chip like some of the the xbox ones.
Major architectural differences? (Score:5, Interesting)
When IBM and ATI announced they be supplying the parts I thought right away there would be no backwards compatibility.
Maybe they'll sneak an XBox1-on-a-chip in there?
Re:Major architectural differences? (Score:5, Informative)
They don't even share endianess
Actually, any PowerPC chip can run in big-endian or little-endian. The reason is, back in the PReP days (then CHRP), PPC was supposed to be The Chip to use for All Operating Systems, as AIX, Solaris, NT, Apple's Copland, and most importantly, Taligent, were supposed to be able to run all on one computer (one box). Ah, those were the days. Computing was expected to have a very different future.
Pre-G5, PPC chips had instructions to convert between big and little endian data or something, or maybe address different endian data. This is why Virtual PC for G5s doesn't exist yet; G5s are missing endian-related instructions that are used by current versions of VPC.
Two things... (Score:3, Interesting)
2) Some more stuff about backward compatibility from a while back here [curmudgeongamer.com]. I don't find it that surprising that Microsoft is willing to break with the Xbox when they release the successor: it will only be energy and money that they lose on their way to trying to be profitable in the video game industry.
VPC (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:VPC (Score:3)
They could change the controller while keeping compatibility, without too much trouble, imo. When playing a PS1 game on a PS2, you need a PS1 memory card. Also, I could be wrong, but I think the PS2 controller's functionality is a superset of the PS1 controller's: The buttons are analog. (I could be wrong because the Dual Shock controllers for the PS1 had analog sticks, but I don't think they had analog button
I never had a PS 1... value gamers (Score:5, Interesting)
For gamers who need to be up to the minute; backwards compatibility is not important.
But for the value gamer; the ones who wait until PS2 games are re-released as "Classics" with the red boarder and sell for $20 (instead of $50)- these are the people who will pick up older games and play them on their modern system.
Cheap skates of the world, Unite!
The sound of silence (Score:3, Insightful)
Backwards compatibility makes a big difference when a system is starting out. I remember telling my parents about each new system, and the first thing they'd ask was "Does it play the old games?".
This is great because it's proving my new theory that Microsoft has not learned from the mistakes that every other company has done in the past. Bad controller design, no "mascot" or established franchise, and now kicking backwards compatibility.
The PS2 roared out of the gates, because even though it had a small launch library, it didn't matter cause there were already 600+ games on the market that it could use. Add in DVD playback and it's no wonder the thing did so well. Same principle applies for Nintendo's GB series. The DS will work too cause it plays GBA games.
I guess this just proves how ready Bill is to profit off the XBox.
knee-jerk (Score:5, Funny)
They're wrong, of course! Uh.. later I'll come up with a reason, I was just a little short on karma.
Emulators (Score:3, Interesting)
Backward compatability (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm sure there are plenty of folks out there that had a PS then bought a PS2, and wanted to continue playing their games. It's much like the PC gaming market. There were plenty of people playing their DOS based games, who wanted to continue playing them on their Win95 boxes. Eventually, that number becomes a minority, but eventually those games get abandon for the newer/better/faster/prettier games. Well, except for those hardcore users who still play Atari games on their Windows 2600 emulators.
Cam you play your original Nintendo games on a Game Cube? Nope. Newer consoles mean newer games. If you are really hell-bent on playing your older games, plug that old console back in.
It doesn't really matter to me, I wouldn't own a Xbox. When I went shopping for new game consoles, every time I tried out an Xbox in the stores, they were either crashed, or would crash while I was playing the game. That's anything but impressive. The Xbox was the only game consle in most stores that I went to, with a reset button that customers could press. For me, it was a decision between PS2 and Game Cube, and I got the PS2 because the rental section at my local Blockbuster had/has more PS2 games.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
If the XBOX weren't so big, I wouldn't care. (Score:4, Interesting)
Most of those consoles aren't very big (the NES is a 2nd-generation unit with the sloping top surface). I wouldn't want to put another XBOX-sized thing in that cabinet. Heck, I can get mini-ATX lan-party boxen smaller than that.
On the other hand, without a hard drive, the XENON/XBOX2 could be significantly smaller and cheaper than the next Sony box, which is designed to be a whole home entertainment box.
My guess? Microsoft is bowing to the pressure of the media companies to not build a media box that could be a PVR, hence no drive. Why they switched to ATI and PowerPC, I haven't a clue. Hmm.. perhaps we'll see Mac-based emulators of the XENON?
You know, you can still use your Xbox (Score:3, Insightful)
Use that to play your old games.
The Xbox isn't a Playstation. There aren't that many games, really (and only about 20 or so are GOOD), and backwards comptability isn't going to really expand it's game library that much.
My feeling about backwards comptability is this: If it costs almost nothing to add to the console (which was the case with the PS2), then great. But if it's going to take major re-engineering that will drive the price up...
Well, if the price is going to go up, I'd rather have it be because the console is being made more powerful. Not because of backwards compatability hacks.
XBox2 - What's the (Selling) Point? (Score:3, Interesting)
If the X2 is not backwards compatable then M$ needs to demonstrate to gamers, even in their current user base, that there is some huge compelling reason to buy an X2 at all.
With PS1/PS2 the prior games base was a big soft cushion that gauranteed that if all else failed you already liked this system, but on top of that there was a serious upgrade to graphics and sound that came with it. For non-backwards-compatible consoles such as NES to SNES to N64 there were literally exponential increases in processing power which made up for a lack of compatability.
At this point in the console world we are hitting diminishing returns. The current generation is already extremely powerful, and one is left to wonder what the next gen has left to offer us. Short of Full Motion Video quality graphics, I'd argue there's not a whole hell of a lot.
We're probably not going to see some incredibly innovative and widely-enjoyed new form of control, or gameplay, or even game genre. Let's face it, you're gonna be playing Splinter Cell: Pandora Next Week Sometime, Halo 3, and Other Popular Game Part 2+ on your new X2, and even then w/o backwards compatability the game base will be tiny compared to what's already available for the Xbox.
First adopters can't be stopped, hell I'd think at this point they're a standard in the equation used to predict new console sales. Geeks will be geeks, a certain set of people will buy it cuz it's new. But after that people with an XBox/GC/PS2 are gonna be looking at $500+ to get the new system and 2 games, or they could spend half that and get 8 new titles for their still-damn-fine-quality systems.
For people that have no system at all - parents with kids just now old enough to want a gaming system, ppl with new spare income, whatever - the price difference between a new X2 system with no used games market, and an XBox at the new MSRP of $99 with 100 used titles available in the bin next to it, it's no question - the cheaper system still kicks more than enough ass to be worthwhile. (we're not counting spoiled kids who neeeeeeeed the newest toys, they all should be shot anyway if they only reason they need thing A over thing B is because Bobby next door has thing A)
The other point, made by many a poster already, is that of space. I friggin love Halo, I will worship Halo 2, and I will want to play both for a long time to come. But now you tell me I need to keep 2 cubic feet of space free in addition to the spot for the X2, oh and different controllers too you say? Even as a devoted XBox fan, I can't agree with this line of thinking at all. At every marketable point, in every way, an X2 that is not backwards compatible cannot possible shake up the console market and win this for M$.
So tell me, please, Microsoft; why the hell do I want your new machine?
backwards compatibility -- who benefits (Score:3, Interesting)
Trade-in, Trade-up (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only did they get money back (or at least a discount) towards a new console, they already had a library of games to play while getting in on some early new console action.
This may not affect sales of the XboX2 in the long run. But a lot of gamers (including me) will wait for the 2nd or 3rd price drop to get a new XboX2. However, by then they may have invested too much in a PS3 and just skip MS.
Using Backwards Compatiblity (Score:5, Insightful)
YES! In fact, I have used it for several games, for the following reasons:
- It just flat out took me a long time to finish the game (Final Fantasy series, MGS VR Missions), because I got distracted with other games/work/bright lights
- The game has a fun head-to-head mode (Soul Blade, Syphon Filter II)
- The game is fun to play more than once (MGS, Syphon Filter)
- I keep the game around for nostalgic purposes (Doom, Warhawk, Original demo disks)
- The game is only available for the PSOne (Final Fantasy IV-VIII)
It's good to be able to sell the old hardware, but keep the games you like to play for use with the new hardware.BTW, the PS2 can speed up disk access and perform smoothing on some PS1 games, which is kind of neat.
Microsoft business model versus the game console (Score:3, Insightful)
Or, in other words, Microsoft (or rather, the prevailing faction Joel called the MSDN camp) just really doesn't quite get the idea of "backward compatibility". So, if it's correct to infer that the current evidence [bbc.co.uk] implies that the market is saturating, then Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot badly.
Of course, some of the market for XBox2 will be for newcomers: while Mumsy and Dadzy may not be willing to by an X-unit for Junior at age 10, they may be more willing (or more tired of the whining) by age 15-- and Junior may have gotten a larger allowance. On the other hand, not all Xbox purchasers are in the teen demographic [blogs.com].
There may be some interesting conceptual connections to M$/RIAA/MPAA attitudes on intellectual property law-- no, you can't play PacMan/Shreck/Bethoven's Fifth for your unit N on your Unit N+1, you have to buy A WHOLE NEW COPY! And for EVERY OTHER THING you have a copy of! Wheee! This, however, is not likely to make consumers with stagnant disposable incomes enraptured of the platform. (Especially given the outsourcing impact of globablization on that disposable income.) Built in obsolescene is one thing; this, however, has the potential for going way too far way too fast.
X1, X2 (Score:3, Insightful)
The Xbox 2 will launch with one or two good games, and a small bunch of other below-average games. At this stage, with backward compatibility, X1 users would sell their X1 to get some cash, and buy an X2. They could play the one good new game, and all their old X1 games. Without backward compatibility... well, most X1 owners of reasonable means and intelligence stick to playing their X1.
As X2 development continues, X1 games drop in price, which is another reason for current X1 owners to not buy an X2.
irrelevant whether old games are played or not (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm switching camps... (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft is really shooting themselves in the foot with this one. Anyone see a pattern with their new console launches?
Re:Power PC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Presumably the appeal of PowerPC is that, while emulating x86 on PowerPC is somewhat feasible (if a bit slow) because of the much greater number of PPC general-purpose registers, it is impossible to emulate the PowerPC on the x86 without severe performance impacts.
This is a very nice copy protection method for Microsof
Re:Power PC? (Score:3, Informative)
Presumably the appeal of PowerPC is that, while emulating x86 on PowerPC is somewhat feasible (if a bit slow) because of the much greater number of PPC general-purpose registers, it is impossible to emulate the PowerPC on the x86 without severe performance impacts.
This is a very nice copy protection method for Microsof
Re:Power PC? (Score:3, Informative)
great, you nutfucker, what's the point of your post?
Probably that changing processor architecture would make backwards compatibility a lot harder / more expensive.
Or maybe he was just fucking nuts.
Re:Backwards compatability a bane for the company? (Score:3, Insightful)
they still make money on the older Ps1 games. the PS2 is a smash hit. So I don't really know how thats an exampel of it not making them any money. If your into economy games (greatest hits ect..) it's unlikly you'd buy the expensive stuff anyway so yoru just wringing the optim