...how likely would it be that Microsoft release an official emulator with live funtionality for PC's to continue on with Live accounts and to be able to continue playing your favorite Xbox games. I just think this would be a great idea, but I don't know if Microsoft would even bother. Imagince being able to bump the resolution in your faverorite games and never and making back up saves to your games without the worry of the Xbox HD going bad...and being able to permanently store game saves and downlaodable content on CDR. I dont know how microsoft would go about this in this day of piracy and all, but if they could figure out a safe and secure way to implement it all I think it would be worth their efforts.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
If Xenon isnt backwards compatible with Xbox...
- Thread starter vesuvious
- Start date
very unlikely. what is likely is that MS will continue Live on Xenon (because Live is independent from the actual system being used on it) and at some point and time end of life all xbox games on it. at that point if a game isn't system link, kiss its multiplayer goodbye.
Spider_Jerusalem
Member
??? What do you mean? Xbox Live will be Xenon's online service, so it really won't "sink", as long as new online games will be published. It will be made a PC online gaming service too, so it will be even more diffused...vesuvious said:
Spider_Jerusalem said:
Let me explain myself better. I know Live will continue on with Xenon, Xbox 360 or whatever it will be called, and also the upcoming PC only Live games will start too. I am just talking about the current Xbox Live compatible games...continuing to be able to enjoy them online...3 to 5 years down the line either backwards compatibility or emulation will be the only way to enjoy some of these games.
Outcast2004
Banned
It's already been commented on, that if you want your Xbox2 to be Backwards compatible, you will have to buy the optional/detachable hard drive.
I really think the HD should be built in, it makes life SO much easier as a gamer.
I really think the HD should be built in, it makes life SO much easier as a gamer.
FortNinety
Member
Not backwards compatible? Great... I don't want to buy the system for just the small handful of Sega games I've already purchased...
Spider_Jerusalem
Member
vesuvious said:
Oh ok, you talked about "Xbox Lives popularity", so I tought you was assuming that Xenon wasn't XBL compatible :lol
Well, I don't know how much of a problem is this... I mean, how many people still bother on playing Live with the first games like Ghost Recon, Mechassault and so on? Mainly too because on Live people likes to switch games very rapidly, so even in last year's games, if you try to log in, you hardly will find someone to play with live. I think that online players are also the most hard core too, so they won't think twice on switching on next-gen games. Now Halo 2 seems very populated, but I wouldn't bet on it once the first next-gen FPSs wil come out. I think that even Pariah, if well done, could drag many players away from Halo 2, expecially with its custom maps feature.
truffleshuffle83
Banned
BACKWARDS COMPATABILITY IS NICE AND ALL, BUT I CAN COUNT ON ONE HAND THE TIMES IVE PLAYED PS1 GAMES SINCE PS2 WAS RELEASED. ITS NOT WORTH IT JUST BUY AN XBOX ALREADY, ITS NOT THAT EXPENSIVE. LOOKING AT OLDER GAMES IS AN EYESORE WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS
radioheadrule83
Banned
The main reason I don't play older generations of 3d games is because the frame rate is absolute balls or the gameplay is broken.
I still play all of the 2D greats from time to time (hell you can have a section of your Xbox devoted to it if you want!) and the truly great 3D titles did everything right. But for the most part, it's slower as well as uglier. And that's just unforgivable.
I know I'll definately play games from this gen next gen though.
I still play all of the 2D greats from time to time (hell you can have a section of your Xbox devoted to it if you want!) and the truly great 3D titles did everything right. But for the most part, it's slower as well as uglier. And that's just unforgivable.
I know I'll definately play games from this gen next gen though.
The people who defend the absence of an in-built HD and BC need to take those green glasses off. All of us assumed Xbox's successor would have both of those features out the box before anything was revealed and would of called someone crazy for thinking they wouldn't be included.
I can't foresee Xbox Live having a big advantage without having, at least, Halo 2 (which is one of the most played online games at the time) being backwards compatible. It'd be like tossing a lot of the userbase away. They could try to make PD0 be their new Live killer app, but it's a big risk to take on such a huge userbase. AFAIK, daily, the max peak of users playing Halo 2 simultaneously is greater than 100K. That is too big a number to ignore. This is not even considering unique accounts playing during a day, which could be quite a lot more, and probably is.
At the very least, I expect a new version of Halo 2 being released for Xbox 2 if it isn't BC.
At the very least, I expect a new version of Halo 2 being released for Xbox 2 if it isn't BC.
Duckhuntdog
Member
Not unless Nvidia is going to let MS and ATI use the Nvidia specific calls on Xenon.
truffleshuffle83
Banned
i guess backwards compatability does have advantages, but if the end product costs more or takes longer to develop a system that supports it, i dont think its worth it
Squirrel Killer
Member
truffleshuffle83 said:
First, fixed. For crying out loud, how can you even write that without getting a headache?
Secondly, I've always said (IRL, not here) that games that don't push the system, i.e. games that don't have very advanced graphics, are the ones that still hold up long after the system becomes obsolete.
Take Pitfall and Pac-Man for the Atari 2600. Pitfall was made within the limitations of the system. It didn't try to use tricks to make the system do more than it was designed to do. In a minimalist sense, it still looks good today. Pac-Man, however, had to resort to various tricks in order to show more moving sprites than the 2600 was designed to show. It looked like ass then, and even more so today. SNES's Super Mario World still looks like butter, but NCAA Basketball on the same system is eye rape. It's hard to think of a PS1 game that didn't use ass ugly textures, but Final Fantasy VII kept it sane, whereas, if we're really honest with ourselves, the T&A carried Tomb Raider far more than the graphics.
truffleshuffle83
Banned
i agree totally, but most people who have ps2's very rarely use it for playing ps1 games, and while there are definatly some ps1 games still worth playing, i dont think theyll be played enough to truly warrant the need for bc. i mean you can buy ps1's for like 20 bucks, so is it that big of a deal??
Squirrel Killer
Member
I was more replying to your comment that "Looking at older games is an eyesore with a few exceptions." and saying that games that don't push the system tend to hold up better when you go back to them years later. Still, backward compatibility is nice, and while few play PS1 games on their PS2 now, I imagine most early run PS2s saw more BC action than Fantavision.
The Faceless Master
Member
truffleshuffle83 said:
yeah, but that's just you, i use BC all the time, my PSX is in a box and my PS2 is used to play PSX games
ImNotLikeThem
Member
and also, ps1 games generally like like shit now. ps2 games do not. people won't be upset in 5 years if they go back and play a ps2 game they never picked up, or and old classic they loved, and play it on thier ps3. a lot of people won't play ps1 games anymore because basically compared to now, they hurt. same thing with GC/Xbox games. in 5 years, they will have aged much better, on average, than ps1/n64/saturn/whateverthefuck have now.
truffleshuffle83
Banned
so is pleasing a small percentage of the gaming community worth the rest of us waiting or having to pay more for a system. i dont think it is
Similar threads
- Poll