Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games)

Xbox 360 Backward Compatibility Finalized 359

Posted by Zonk from the surprises dept.
News for nerds writes "Microsoft has finally announced the list of the 213 Xbox 1 games playable on Xbox 360 at launch. A software emulator is required for each original Xbox game, which means you need an HDD for these games to work on Xbox 360. While it is expected that the list will grow in future via Live update, as of now it lacks first-party titles such as Project Gotham Racing, and other popular titles such as DOAU/X, Doom 3, Far Cry, KUF, Panzer Dragoon Orta, the Splinter Cell series, and the SW: Battlefront series." Xbox.com is also featuring an interview with Todd Homdahl about the quest for compatibility.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox 360 Backward Compatibility Finalized More

Xbox 360 Backward Compatibility Finalized

Comments Filter:

  • PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jamesjw ( 213986 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @07:48AM (#14014910) Homepage
    Why not just build something with built in hardware emulation? like the PS2 does with PS1 games - i know its not 100% but it makes sense to do it this way doesnt it?

    -- Jim.

    • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ScottyUK ( 824174 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @07:52AM (#14014922)
      Didn't Sony include the essential bits of the PS1 system in the PS2 in order to allow backwards compatibility? I don't think NVIDIA would let Microsoft do this, as they own the rights to the graphics card used in the Xbox.

      • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:5, Informative)

        by nathanh ( 1214 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:49AM (#14015041) Homepage
        Didn't Sony include the essential bits of the PS1 system in the PS2 in order to allow backwards compatibility?

        Correct. The IOP (IO processor) on the PS2 normally handles input from the DVD, game controllers, USB, etc. However it's basically a souped up version of the PSX CPU with all the associated bits, so send it the right instructions and it detaches from the EE (main processors) and the system becomes a nearly 100% compatible PSX.

        Sony could do this because the PSX CPU was 33MHz and had 2MB SDRAM and mere kilobytes of graphics memory. When the PS2 was being made the cost of each IOP must have been measured in tens of cents. The Xbox 360 is being released too soon after the Xbox; the 733MHz Celeron plus the NV25 GPU is still fairly expensive.

    • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Quick Sick Nick ( 822060 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @07:53AM (#14014924)
      It's makes perfect sense, but from a technological aspect it's impossible. The Xbox 360 uses a treo of PowerPC processors to run games, in sharp contrast to an intel pentium III of the original xbox. A lot of code simply will not go over. Given these constraints, Microsoft could have either said "fuck it, no backwards compatibility" or they could try their best to port some games anyway. I'm glad they chose the latter.

      • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Kjella ( 173770 )
        Given these constraints, Microsoft could have either said "fuck it, no backwards compatibility" or they could try their best to port some games anyway. I'm glad they chose the latter.

        Chose and chose. Not having backwards compatibility on a console is pretty much shooting yourself in the foot. I suppose the current effort could be described as "We only grazed the foot".
        • Since when did not having backwards compatability become, "shooting yourself in the foot"? Outside of Nintendo's handheld devices, the extra hardware to let the Sega Genesis play Master System cartridges, and the PS2's ability to play certain PS1 games there really aren't many examples of backward compatibility in consoles.
          • The backward compatibility was never a problem for Genesis. The Master System cartridge converter was like $20.

          • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Txiasaeia ( 581598 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @10:19AM (#14015310)
            There sure is: the revo will be backwards compatible for gamecube (and earlier Nintendo) consoles, and the PS3 is apparently backwards compatible (if not 100%, then close to it). If the Xbox360 is only partially BC and the other two are (for the most part), then they could be shooting themselves in the foot with regard to competition in the next gen. If somebody needs to keep their Xbox to play Xbox games because it won't play *all* their Xbox games, what's to stop this theoretical person from getting a PS3 or Revo instead?

          • Re:PS2 and PS1 games? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @10:36AM (#14015359) Homepage
            Since when did not having backwards compatability become, "shooting yourself in the foot"?

            Since your two biggest competitors (Sony PS3, Nintendo revolution) have announced that feature? And that it was one of the major reasons the Dreamcast was hurled into obscurity and securing the Playstation's spot as market leader?

            Outside of Nintendo's handheld devices, the extra hardware to let the Sega Genesis play Master System cartridges, and the PS2's ability to play certain PS1 games there really aren't many examples of backward compatibility in consoles.

            If by "certain" you mean all except 10 out of 8000, even the controllers were largly compatible. The new slimline model is getting complaints because it is incompatible with 7 PS2 and 40 PS1 games. That's 0,5% of the PS1 games, up from 0,13%. The two market leaders, Nintendo (handheld) and Sony (console) are doing it, those that haven't have failed. Can you say "formula for success"? If that was supposed to be an argument against me, it's a pretty pathetic one.
            • Since your two biggest competitors (Sony PS3, Nintendo revolution) have announced that feature? And that it was one of the major reasons the Dreamcast was hurled into obscurity and securing the Playstation's spot as market leader?

              So in your mind, the history of game consoles starts in 1999?

              The PS1 was obviously not backward compatible with anything and it did pretty well. Same deal with the original Xbox.

              Hardware manufacturers made the mistake of putting too much stock in backward compatibility in 1982-198
              • So in your mind, the history of game consoles starts in 1999?

                It's nothing to do with history. It's to do with what the current compatition are doing. And they are both going to be backwards compatible.

                Neither Sony nor MS could even exist in the video game industry if backward compatibility was a requirement for success.

                MS is neither here nor there because they didn't win the last console war. Sony did, in no small part because of it's backwards compatibility to the winner of the previous generation. The
            • Oh, that's rich. The Dreamcast flopped because it couldn't play SATURN games? You think there were throngs and throngs of Saturn owners with massive collectons which they were desperate to play on a modern machine?
      • The PS2 essentially included the base hardware of the PS1. Processor included. Since this is the comparison made by the root post I think the point is that MS could have included a full PIII class processor for backwards compatibility.

        Taking this approach its far from impossible. Expensive yes, impossible no.
      • Errm, nope.

        My Powerbook G4 with one slow PPC (1.5 Ghz) can get the performance of a 400 Mhz intel Celery (with all of the instructions).

        The product? Micro$oft Virtual PC :)

        They bought this at about the time the XBox 360 was going to be a PPC - so I'm sure they use it. This would give them a nice virtual Pentium III, and don't both consoles use some special version of DirectX? the sys calls could be reimplemented for the (much more powerful!) new graphics card in the 360.
      • The Xbox 360 uses a treo of PowerPC processors to run games...

        WOW this is totally incorrect. first of all, the XBOX 360 doesn't use a treo at all, to run ANYTHING. where the hell did you hear that?? second, the latest treo's use either intel's PXA270 chip or an ARM processor...and get this, the fastest of of those two processors is just 312 MHz!!! i'd like to see you play doom3 with that. and THIRD, even if MS decided to use a freakin' TREO in the XBOX 360...which as i said is totally ludicrous...how the
    • Uhh, Pretty sure NVIDIA has given Microsoft the finger and stopped producing the NV2A GPU... no true hardware emulation there. I'm guessing NVIDIA lawyers have already been annoying M$ lawyers on how they intend to emulate any proprietary GPU features in the NV2A.

      Intel would've killed the custom P3 CPU they were using if M$ couldn't get the GPU's for the boxes, so they'd need to stick in a real x86 CPU. All I see from Intel is "LETS COOK EGGS UNTIL MID WAY THIS YEAR". AMD, pfft, can't supply enough right no
    • Why not? Sounds reasonable, yes? Aside from, you know, requiring a hard drive (extra 100$), you mean?

  • Software Emulation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Station ( 621731 ) <marose@v t . edu> on Saturday November 12, 2005 @07:50AM (#14014915) Homepage
    Looks like the entire thing will be (as expected) run off of software emulation. Really, considering the technical challenges involved (I know, software emulation isn't impossible, but the fact that it can run the system at full speed on a completly different hardware type is nice) I'm pleasently surprised at the number of games already available. I also like the fact that the system will run all your old games in HiDef and add a layer of FSAA (almost like the old Sega 32x).
    • That's exactly what the 360 needs to make it a resounding success: More features that cause people to draw direct comparisons between it and the Sega32x.

      Wait... that can't be right....

    • I'm pleasently surprised at the number of games already available.

      Actually, there is a very interesting point behind the fact that *NOT ALL* Xbox games are immediately runnable on the 360's emulator. There are two issues here.

      - Firstly, if not all Xbox games run under the emulator, this clearly implies that the Xbox emulation is incomplete. If it were complete, then any Xbox title wouldn't even know that it's running under emulation, and all games would run by default. So, it's not complete, currently.

      -
      • In other words, Microsoft seems to be identifying "compatibility" with "authorization by us" for a game to run on the 360 console. I guess it's what one would expect, given their desire for control, although it certainly isn't helpful to players who own minority-interest games.

        Yeah, this seems unecessarily limited to me too - at the very least, seems like a choice to tell the system "Try and run this game, I understand that it's not Microsoft's fault if it doesn't work. *insert massive legal disclaimer here

      • Actually, there is a very interesting point behind the fact that *NOT ALL* Xbox games are immediately runnable on the 360's emulator. There are two issues here.

        - Firstly, if not all Xbox games run under the emulator, this clearly implies that the Xbox emulation is incomplete. If it were complete, then any Xbox title wouldn't even know that it's running under emulation, and all games would run by default. So, it's not complete, currently.

        - Secondly, since the interview says that the emulator can be downloade

    • BLAH! (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Spy der Mann ( 805235 )
      They could've just included an XBOX subsystem inside the 360, just like the Commodore 128 had a C64 subsystem. 99.9% compatibility guaranteed. And didn't the SNES have (to be bought separately) a NES adapter? Didn't the PS2 play PS1 games? Can't the Gamecube play GBA games?

      Frankly I can't understand why the decision of software emulation. But well, this is Microsoft.
      • Through the high-tech magic of my television, I have devised a scheme that will allow me to be 100% compatible with all Xbox titles.

        My TV has 3 (3!) available component sources. So I can just KEEP my Xbox, get a 360, and have my cable box all plugged in at the same time.

        With the click of the 'source' button on my TV remote, I can switch between the systems at will.

        Yes...this is the way backwards compatibility should be done.
        • One problem with just keeping the old XBox is it costs you money, compared to selling it if the 360 were a direct replacement.

          I was going to check the market value of the XBox, but when I search for "XBox" ebay changes my search and says "1496 items found for Microsoft Xbox 360 - Game console"... no original XBox results come up at all, just zillions and zillions of identical auctions for 360's. At the bottom of each page is a long list of "reviews" (for the as-yet nonexistent product) that are mostly sh

      • Re:BLAH! (Score:4, Informative)

        by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @04:50PM (#14017004) Homepage Journal
        "They could've just included an XBOX subsystem inside the 360, just like the Commodore 128 had a C64 subsystem."

        And add even more to the cost + having to buy chips from both NVida and ATI? Heh. There's a brilliant move.

        "And didn't the SNES have (to be bought separately) a NES adapter?"

        No.

        "Can't the Gamecube play GBA games?"

        No.

        "Frankly I can't understand why the decision of software emulation. But well, this is Microsoft."

        Cost and practicality.

  • What they've done is incredible! (Score:3, Funny)

    by J. T. MacLeod ( 111094 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @07:57AM (#14014930)
    Yes, they've manage to not include in their list a SINGLE game I care about!

    Seriously. Wow.

  • Pretty screwed up (Score:3, Insightful)

    by external400kdiskette ( 930221 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:04AM (#14014946)
    It's going to look bad marketing a machine with backwards compatability when the backwards compatability consists of the emulation of *some* games assuming you have the more expensive xbox and the *hope* of more support in future.
    • That's exactly how the PS2's backward compatibility worked when it was released. Only PS1 games written using the Sony libraries was compatible. Any game that was developed by going directly to the hardware wasn't supported. That meant that most later-cycle PS1 games wouldn't work.
  • I was honestly only expecting maybe a few dozen of the most popular titles, so I'm pleasantly surprised at the quantity of supported games. Now if only they can work on the quality of the supported games...

  • My collection (Score:5, Informative)

    by ninjakoala ( 890584 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:07AM (#14014951)
    Just to give you an idea of how bad it looks at the moment, here is my collection divided into working and not working:

    Working:
    Amped, Colin McRae '04, Dead or Alive 3, Fable, Forza Motorsport, Fusion Frenzy, Halo, Halo 2, Jade Empire, Phantom Crash, Sega GT 2002, Knights of the Old Republic, Knights of the Old Republic 2, The Thing

    Not working:
    The Bard's Tale, Blood Wake, Burnout, Dead or Alive Ultimate, Dragon's Lair 3D: Return to the Lair, Morrowind, F1 Career Challenge, Project Zero, Gunvalkyrie, Knockout Kings 2002, Links 2004, Mechassault, Outlaw Golf, OutRun 2, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Phantasy Star Online I+II, Project Gotham Racing 2, Rainbow Six 3, Rallisport Challenge 2. Jet Set Radio, Serious Sam, Shenmue 2, Splinter Cell, Taito Legends, Unreal Championship, Wreckless, Yager

    And here I was thinking "oh, ok, a couple of my games won't work... worst case scenario half won't work". This is just crazy though. I hope they boost the compatibility in a big way, or I just can't see my self upgrading, since that would mean I would have to keep the current black box under the tv as well.

    • Re:My collection (Score:4, Informative)

      by RogueyWon ( 735973 ) * on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:26AM (#14014984) Journal
      I've got a 360 on pre-order, which I'll be picking up the day it comes out. I've been a vocal defender of the X-Box and the 360 for some time. Even I have to admit that this list is not good enough. The impact of this on my own games is:

      Working

      BG: Dark Alliance 2, Battle Engine Aquilla, Crimson Skies, Forza, GTA3, GTA:VC, Halo, Halo 2, Jade Empire, KOTOR, KOTOR 2, Spyhunter 2.

      Not working (*s indicate games whose inclusion here frankly defies belief, as they've been major titles)

      Area 51, *Burnout 3*, *Burnout Revenge*, *Chronicles of Riddick*, Colin McRae 04, *Full Spectrum Warrior*, Mechassault, *Mechassault 2*, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Secret Weapons over Normandy, *SW: Republic Commando*, Wallace & Grommit.

      The titles I've starred there are some of the biggest games on the X-Box. A good number of them are relatively recent releases. As far as I'm concerned, there's no excuse whatsoever for them not being included. All I can say is that this will need to change by the launch date.

      • Re:My collection (Score:5, Insightful)

        by GizmoToy ( 450886 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @09:17AM (#14015114) Homepage
        It occurrs to me that some of those titles may not be scheduled for backwards compatibility because they are to be release native for the 360. Burnout Revenge comes to mind, and I'm sure a Splinter Cell will make it. Perhaps Microsoft is trying to force everyone to buy the latest version (native to the 360, of course) of many of the popular series titles?
      • I agree with Gizmo Toy (one of my brother posts) but the one I was most disappointed in was Links 2004.

        Tiger Woods...to put it frankly...sucks. When compared to Links that is. I was really hoping for a new Links, which would just absolutely seal up the likelihood of me buying an Xbox 360 on launch day.

        Now, I will make an attempt to buy one on launch day...and maybe I'll get one- but probably not. I won't go through the extra effort that I would have, if it looked like a new version of Links was coming ou

    • Patience, grasshopper (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Namarrgon ( 105036 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:26AM (#14014985) Homepage
      From the interview:

      Xbox.com: What criteria do you use in choosing which Xbox games will be backward compatible on Xbox 360? How far back into the Xbox game library are you going to go?

      Todd: When we say Xbox library, we mean the entire Xbox library. This ranges all the way from our launch in 2001 up to games that haven't even shipped yet.

      If they can do 241 games in a few months, including writing the emulator, I don't imagine the rest will take that long. In the meantime, you'll just have to be content with running your Xbox games on your Xbox, tough as that is.

      • Well, of course they get the big demanding games running first and a lot of the others will work automagically. But that's why I was expecting a much larger percentage. Well, at least there are no launch titles that are really pulling at my wallet yet and I'm far from done with my current catalogue, so 360 will have to wait. Let's hope Revolution doesn't get out before I'm ready to upgrade or I bet 360 will have to wait a while longer. Mmmm Sin & Punishment ^_^

        It's probably not as easy as you make it se

        • It's probably not as easy as you make it seem though. Remember when Bleem! wanted to release a full Playstation emulator for Dreamcast? Then something like 5 discs with support for a group of games... then finally a handful of games were supported with one Bleem! disc per game.

          I think this had more to do with legal ramification of the emulator versus getting the game to run. This was before Sony not being able to shutdown the Mac playstation emulator, so the Bleem producers were more afraid of Sony than

    • Re:My collection (Score:5, Funny)

      by JPyun ( 911266 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @03:25PM (#14016625)
      Wow. You have a lot of shitty games.

  • If they were smart (Score:4, Interesting)

    by LaughingCoder ( 914424 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:11AM (#14014955)
    The could offer some sort of trade-in program where you could get the new version of the game on the cheap if you turned in your old disk. Of course most of these games are non-Microsoft products, so such a program would need to be offered by lots of different companies. In the long run this would probably have been cheaper than trying to implement backwards compatibility. Many times the best solution to a technical problem isn't technical.
    • ...to a completely different architecture, of every single Xbox game, with all the associated debugging, testing etc - and that's assuming they can get ahold of the source code to the third party games too (yeah, like studios are going to hand over their IP lifeblood, to Microsoft at that).

      It's a lot smarter for them to write an emulator.

      • I think you haven't grasped exactly what I was saying. The game doesn't have to be identical - I would think the next generation of the "same" game (eg Madden 2006 for a Madden 2004 tradein) would make people very happy. The vendor could decide what the tradein was - Microsoft could "mandate" (ie subsidize) that *some* title was offered in trade for every old XBOX title (and when I say in trade I mean for a significant discount, not for free). For zealots who want the exact same gameplay, well they will jus
        • Actually the certification of the games mean that they run as well or better than on the original Xbox. Better quality video output and potentially higher framerate (assuming it isn't locked in code). Besides that gameplay should be identical.

  • Wow, Microsoft IS all-seeing! (Score:5, Funny)

    by tgd ( 2822 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:18AM (#14014963)
    Its like someone looked at my rack of XBox games and picked everyone one I've finished to be compatible, and every one I haven't to not be.

    *tinfoil hat*

  • Emulation + (Score:5, Informative)

    by GweeDo ( 127172 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:20AM (#14014969) Homepage
    Don't forget that all your emulated Xbox games can now be ran at 720p or 1080i with full Anti-Aliasing as well. This could help a number of games look really nice. Here are some shots [bungie.net] of Halo and Halo 2 in 720p from Bungie. It does make a very nice difference.
    • I believe that's a Halo specific thing. I have yet to hear anything of the other games actually being upscaled like that.
    • You can run the games at higher screen resolutions. But in most games the textures and models aren't any higher rez than before. So it's like running Half-Life (not 2) in 1600x1200 on your PC. It doesn't look significantly better than it did at 800x600, because although the screen is high res, the only thing that gets sharper is the edges, the textures don't look any better, and the models are still low poly count. It is very similar to uprezzing a DVD.

      I believe they updated the collateral (textures and per
  • While there is Halo and Halo 2 support (they would have a lot of pissed users if there wasn't), there is no Project Gotham Racing 2 support. Part of me wonders if there is no support for it due to PGR3 being a launch title. Are there any other launch title sequals with no backwards compatiblity???

    It wouldn't suprise me at all for Microsoft to do this for the money.

  • Their first big mistake (Score:3, Insightful)

    by techstar25 ( 556988 ) <techstar25@gmail. c o m> on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:23AM (#14014979) Journal
    Here it is. Microsofts first huge mistake. If they were only selling one version of the 360 at launch it wouldn't be a problem, but since the "CORE" package will not be backwards compatible with anything, we're are going to have a lot of unhappy people on Christmast morning when their old Xbox games don't work. This is a disaster in the making.
    Now they have to market it as two different versions of the 360, the backwards compatible version and the not backwards compatible version. Considering the CORE system was to be marketed towards casual gamers, it is these same casual gamers who don't want to spend $60 a pop on brand new games on launch day.
    Are they trying to make the CORE system obsolete before launch? They can't be a wise idea, especialy since price is king at Chrismas time.

    • Re:Their first big mistake (Score:4, Insightful)

      by sqlrob ( 173498 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:28AM (#14014996)
      The core system is only there so they can say "XBox 360 is 299"

      If you buy core, don't forget the memory card, which is going to drive the price close to the "enhanced" system anyway
    • Two things:

      First off, why on Earth would anyone, even the most casual gamer, commit to spending the money on a brand new system to run the games he already has a system for? Buying a 360 to play old Xbox games doesn't make any sense. Anyone with half a brain will at least be waiting for one or two games to come out on the 360 that they want before they consider buying it.

      Second, it's a money-making tactic. Some people don't want to spend $400 up-front. So when they buy the cheap model, and a couple months l

  • cracking prediction (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BushCheney08 ( 917605 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @08:57AM (#14015069)
    In the interview, he mentions that people who don't have the Live service will be able to download the new binaries to their computers, burn a cd, put that in their 360 and it'll update. I predict that this is the exact mechanism that will initially be exploited to allow arbitrary code to run on these things. Just a hunch...
    • Anything is possible depending on implementation, but the way I'd imagine doing it is as follows. When the system boots, look for a certain file on the CD. If you find that file, then copy all other files on the CD over to the hard disk. Every file would be signed with a private key and verified before copying. Not a whole lot of opportunity to slip in a bad file or some bogus code.
    • I predict that this is the exact mechanism that will initially be exploited to allow arbitrary code to run on these things. Just a hunch...

      Since when did the 360 run unsigned code? And even if you could get some malicious code signed, do you think it'd have access to overwrite the 360's own files? They must have made many implementation mistakes for this to work the way you think it will.
  • If you own a XBOX game, that usually means you own a XBOX. If you want XBOX360, go buy it. But if you want to play your old XBOX game, play it with your old XBOX.
    Secondly, most game publishers will release XBOX360 version of their "still selling" existing titles.

    I'm not even sure we ever need an emulator here although it's definitely a good thing.
    • Sometimes it's not a matter of the games you already own. I'll use myself as an example.

      Back when I had the choice between N64 and Playstation, I chose the N64. Then three years later, I had the choice between the GC, the PS2, and the Xbox. Since I didn't have a PS1, the PS2 was an extremely attractive option for me. Not only would I have the PS2 titles available at launch, I could go out and splurge on a huge number of PS1 classic "must-haves" that were selling for 10 bucks each.

      With the current
  • The first Xbox was an nvidia chip, the new one is ATi - some games contain hardware specific optimizations, and nVidia refused to license them to emulate their hardware, for anyone that actually read up on the issue.
    • I don't think the nVidia/ATI switch is nearly as bothersome as the Intel/PowerPC switch.

      • I don't think the nVidia/ATI switch is nearly as bothersome as the Intel/PowerPC switch.

        This is hilarious. Have you ever written a GPU emulator before? Then you have no idea what's involved.

        CPU emulators are EASY. Think about how many CPU emulators there are on the market: Virtual PC, VMWare, Fusion (Mac 68k), etc. Hell, I had to write a MIPS emulator as a solo project in a college-level computer engineering class. The main reason they're so easy is that the CPU instruction sets are well-studied a

  • I see a bunch of people here freaking out that most of their games are not on the list, so I wanted to throw some thoughts out:

    Is someone going to come into your house and smash your old XBox as soon as you buy the 360? I know, I know: some people might be doing a trade in, where you give them a perfectly good XBox and they give you a pitance.

    From Microsoft's perspective, backwards compatibility is not primarily so that you can still play your old games. Backwards compatibility is to give Microsoft a larg
  • Pretty incredible that they've managed to miss just about every important game. Sure, having Halo, etc. working may be a popular move, but it's only temporary - Halo 3, PGR 3, Ghost Recon 3, DOA4, etc. are all due for X360 sequels anyway.

    What about the important Xbox exclusives - Jet Set Radio, Outrun 2, Panzer Dragoon, etc. - games that aren't likely to make an appearance on the X360 (at least any time soon)?

    OK, the different architectures make things difficult, but in that case, why not put Xbox compatabi
  • Instead of wasting time with backwards compatibility that apparently isn't good enough, MS should have just made an audio/video cable pass-thru connector on the Xbox 360. That way, you connect your Xbox to your 360, and whenever the Xbox is on, the 360 will just pass the audio and video signal through itself and on to your A/V equipment.

    Fortunately for me, I don't need to do this, as my receiver has enough switchable A/V inputs for both my Xbox and a new Xbox 360.

    Some company needs to invent a box that

  • From what i understand with most emulators, it takes roughly 5-10 times the processing power to emulate one piece of hardware on another. but i remember reading years ago that since the xbox was basically a pc, that 1:1 emulation should be possible and not require a 6 ghz pc to run games at full speed. i haven't looked for awhile but was curious as to how this statement was flawed.
    • I'm curious about this one as well; I've never completely understood what the technical limitation is that would keep someone from creating some sort of Xbox emulator for modern PC's that would let you just stick in an xbox game and play it.
  • Isn't the HDD only standard on the non-core system? Also, how big are the emulators going to be? The XBox HDD is only 20 gb right? Is this going to conflict with everything else on your drive?

    A lot of fun was poked at Nintendo over the entry cost of FF:CC [vgcats.com] I don't see why this is any different. To some degree this might be worse?
  • Could anyone explain to me why backward compatability on a console is such a big deal? We didn't have it, for example, for the NES->SNES->Nintendo 64->Gamecube transitions and nobody really minded. If you already own XBOX games, you've already got a XBOX to play them on. I can't imagine many people want to buy old XBOX games for their brand new XBOX360 either. OK, some people might want to get the better known games (e.g. HALO) but it really isn't worth the hassle of backwards compatibility in my o
    • It's an advantage because you can get rid of clutter in your house by getting rid of one console if another offers complete or near-complete emulation of the old. This may not be a huge deal for most of us the States, but Japan is a pretty big video gaming market too, and space is at a premium there. Even living in rural Florida, though, it's a convenience to not have to find a place/power outlet for my old consoles (or to have to deal with the tangle of cables that exists in and around my TV space).

      Also

    • Because not everyone has the space to keep all their old consoles hooked up to their TV. And, the old xbox looked like crap, and stood out like an ugly sore thunb in my living room
  • Ok, maybe I'm just daft. But am I the only one who is looking at this per title 'emulation file' and thinking it isn't anything of the sort? How much do you want to bet they plan to emulate the non-critical code, which is possible with the hardware available, but have that emulator somehow merge in custom recompiled/ported code for the time critical bits? Because face it folks, the CPU cycles available to them just ain't there to fully emulate a P733 in software. If so you can pretty much forget any titl

  • Finalized = Not really? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by eagl ( 86459 ) on Saturday November 12, 2005 @01:20PM (#14016070) Journal
    If an emulator must be specifically coded for every title, it doesn't sound backwards compatible at all. It's a bit like calling a wintel box "commodore 64 backwards compatible" since you can code an emulator, but worse since each game needs separate work and a piece of non-standard hardware (the optional hard drive) to work at all.

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close