• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

No backward compatibility in Xbox 2 (Article)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=dev&aid=3645

Rob Fahey 16:15 21/06/2004

Because two boxes under the TV are as good as one, apparently

Sources close to Microsoft's senior Xbox executives have confirmed that the company does not intend to make its next-generation console, which is set to be launched by late 2005, backwards compatible with existing Xbox software.

Speculation about the backwards compatibility functionality has been rife since it emerged that Xbox 2 - codenamed Xenon - will have radically different hardware to the original system, with a non-x86 processor, no hard drive and an ATI, rather than NVIDIA, graphics chipset, all of which would make running Xbox titles on the platform very difficult.

It was widely believed, however, that Microsoft had retained a team of hardware emulation experts to work on the problem - although concerns over the viability of such an endeavour were voiced by some experts, especially regarding the company's ability to emulate the functions of the graphics unit in the Xbox without violating NVIDIA's intellectual property rights.

GamesIndustry.biz has now learned that Microsoft does not plan to provide any backwards compatibility in the next-generation Xenon platform - and indeed, that senior executives at the company don't believe backwards compatibility to be an important feature for consoles.

According to a source close to the project, internal Microsoft figures suggest that only 10 per cent of PlayStation 2 purchasers were interested in the console's ability to play titles developed for the original PlayStation.

Although this still represents some seven million consumers on a global basis - which is around half of Microsoft's entire installed base for Xbox - the company apparently believes that allowing consumers to play existing Xbox titles on the next-generation hardware would not be a significant deciding factor for Xenon purchasers.

However, a report into the videogames industry published today by Wedbrush Morgan Securities senior vice president Michael Pachter disagrees with this conclusion - arguing that failing to provide backward compatibility could have the effect of alienating Microsoft's existing Xbox installed base.

"In the event that Xbox Next is not backward compatible, we think that the device will be very slow to grow its footprint," the report warns, while elsewhere it suggests that such a move could damage the company's long-term prospects for the console.

"We do expect Microsoft to launch its console first, perhaps as early as 2005," says Pachter. "Should it choose to do so without backward compatibility or significant third-party software support, we expect to see its first-mover advantage evaporate."
 

Mr Mike

1 million Canadian dollars
The day GI.biz writes a story with a neutral or positive spin on something about Microsoft is the day I will eat my GameCube in some kind of magical console salad.
 

Justin Bailey

------ ------
Soooo. . .

. . .all the advantages they had this gen (best hardware + hard drive) are thrown out the door and on top of that they decide to nix BC? I don't think this is going to work out for them in the end.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Well, it's a bit of a no-brainer given the substantial hardware changes. How were they going to emulate a hard drive?

How much of an impact it'll have is anyone's guess, though (though 10% of people being interested in backwards compatibility doesn't sound wildly off the mark, and I'd expect a good chunk of that 10% to be interested - but not to the point that they won't buy XBox 2 without it).
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
Laurent said:
Wow... I thought EVERYBODY learned that lesson from Sony and PlayStation2!

Yeah, they did. Don't rely on Playstation games to sell your system when you have an asstacular launch lineup. Or... see how much backwards compatibility can make your system unstable!
 

Laurent

Member
Like someone said before...

- 1st Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of gamers (power + online)
- 2nd Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of shareholders (profitability)
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
I was going to dismiss this as more GI fodder, but their inclusion of those quotes from the Wedbrush Morgan Securities report is interesting. For those of us on the GAF who believe that backwards-compatibility is actually important, it's nice to see some kind of validation through non-GAF channels.
 

Rhindle

Member
*YAWN*

Another day, another gi.biz anti-MS diatribe.

With no basis.

No sources.

Posted as "FACT" on GAF.

With a 15-page thread resulting.

Carry on.
 

cvxfreak

Member
Laurent said:
Like someone said before...

- 1st Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of gamers (power + online)
- 2nd Microsoft console = Gaining the heart of shareholders (profitability)

Heh
 

Rhindle

Member
human5892 said:
I was going to dismiss this as more GI fodder, but their inclusion of those quotes from the Wedbrush Morgan Securities report is interesting. For those of us on the GAF who believe that backwards-compatibility is actually important, it's nice to see some kind of validation through non-GAF channels.
The Wedbush report doesn't say it will not be backwards compatible.

It says that IF it is not backwards compatible, and IF there "no signficant third-party support," it will lose its advantage.

DUH.
 

Laurent

Member
DopeyFish said:
Yeah, they did. Don't rely on Playstation games to sell your system when you have an asstacular launch lineup. Or... see how much backwards compatibility can make your system unstable!
So they sold so many PlayStation2 the first year because it was the only new system out there? Because it could read DVD?
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
Rhindle said:
The Wedbush report doesn't say it will not be backwards compatible.

It says that IF it is not backwards compatible, and IF there "no signficant third-party support," it will lose its advantage.

DUH.
I know they don't say it will be. But they do say:
In the event that Xbox Next is not backward compatible, we think that the device will be very slow to grow its footprint.
Notice there is no mention of "AND no signifcant third-party support" in that sentence.

DUH.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Rhindle said:
Another day, another gi.biz anti-MS diatribe.

With no basis.

No sources.

However, a report into the videogames industry published today by Wedbrush Morgan Securities senior vice president Michael Pachter

Rhindle said:
No sources.

However, a report into the videogames industry published today by Wedbrush Morgan Securities senior vice president Michael Pachter

Rhindle said:
No sources.

However, a report into the videogames industry published today by Wedbrush Morgan Securities senior vice president Michael Pachter
 

IJoel

Member
The are 4 big problems with BC that MS is simply ignoring for the sake of saving money. It's obvious. As much as I love the Xbox, it's just a pity they are taking this route.

1. Developers making the transition would benefit from BC. They'd be able to release an Xbox game for both Xbox/Xbox 2 and could even take advantage of Xbox 2 features without significant expenses.

2. Success isn't entirely tied up to the launch lineup. Having BC would simply provide a huge opportunity to capitalize on an already excellent library of games. Say what you will, but 20 launch games + existing extensive library of games >>>> merely 20 launch games.

3. Marketing. Both Sony and Nintendo will exploit Xbox 2's shortcomings while providing an equally competitive console. It'll be a visible disadvantage of the Xbox 2.

4. Features (if they choose to not put a HD on Xbox 2). It's like taking away from the consumers after getting them used to those existing features. No capability for custom soundtracks, using your Xbox as a jukebox, etc.

It's sad. There's simply no positive side of looking at this. Sure, it saves MS money, but from a consumer perspective, it's a lose lose situation.
 

Rhindle

Member
Iapetus: For the second time, the Wedbush report DOES NOT SAY XB2 will not be backwards compatible.

Read the damned article before making a fool of yourself.
 

IJoel

Member
Laurent said:
So they sold so many PlayStation2 the first year because it was the only new system out there? Because it could read DVD?

Actually PS2's ability to play DVDs was a huge selling point. The argument that you could get both a DVD player and the latest game console was a powerful marketing tool used by Sony. I certainly know a lot of people that got one because of that same reason.
 

akascream

Banned
For some reason I'm reminded of all the doom and gloom prior to Xbox launch. I wouldn't be so quick to call Xenon a failure.. especially with MS' deep pockets.
 

cvxfreak

Member
Laurent said:
So they sold so many PlayStation2 the first year because it was the only new system out there? Because it could read DVD?

Well, yeah, truthfully that's true (uh... truthfully true :)). In Japan, the PS2 rivaled and was cheaper than the cost of most DVD Players so people jumped at the chance to get one.
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
akascream said:
For some reason I'm reminded of all the doom and gloom prior to Xbox launch. I wouldn't be so quick to call Xenon a failure.. especially with MS' deep pockets.
I don't think no BC instantly means failure, but I do think it's a factor in potential failure depending on certain other conditions, as the report cited by GI says.
 

Chopin Trusty Balls

First casualty in the war on idioticy.
You can spend money developing BC emulation and paying Nvidia for licences,or you can pay third parties to deliver tons of stuff for launch,guess which road MS took? They additionally signed quite a few big independat developers,so i guess they will have like 30% software sales marketshare around launch of XB2.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Rhindle said:
Iapetus: For the second time, the Wedbush report DOES NOT SAY XB2 will not be backwards compatible.

My bad, I missed the bit where you qualified your 'No sources' claim.

Wait a second...

And yes, I'm entirely sure the Wedbush report just raises the issue as an entirely random thing they thought was important to mention rather than as a reaction to such rumours.
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
I remember people arguing all the time saying XboxLive would fail without 56k support. Anyone here remember that?
 

Baron Aloha

A Shining Example
Rhindle said:
*YAWN*
Another day, another gi.biz anti-MS diatribe.
With no basis.
No sources.
Posted as "FACT" on GAF.
With a 15-page thread resulting.
Carry on.

Word.

Just listen to all these arm chair analysts. You guys should let the MS execs run their business however they see fit. They are one of the most successful corporations in the world. They know best.

I fully support their decision not to offer BC in the Xbox 2 because BC would only complicate matters for them. Now they can focus on having the Xbox 2 ready for a Fall 2005 launch in the states (which I fully support). This gen started getting stale a while ago imo and 2004 looks like it will be the last year for some truly good games. It's time to move on. Thankfully MS will be leading the way.
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
DopeyFish said:
I remember people arguing all the time saying XboxLive would fail without 56k support. Anyone here remember that?
People say things will fail/succeed when they actually end up doing the opposite millions of times a year. It doesn't mean any one is particularly analogous to another, even if both scenarios in question involve the word "Xbox".
 
Rhindle said:
The Wedbush report doesn't say it will not be backwards compatible.

It says that IF it is not backwards compatible, and IF there "no signficant third-party support," it will lose its advantage.

DUH.

What Michael Pachter (Wedbush Morgan Analyst) has to say on this:

"However, we believe that Microsoft’s recent announcement of XNA tools for development of both PC games and next generation Xbox games indicates its intention to revamp the Xbox format; as a result, we do not expect the Xbox Next (the Xenon?) to be backward compatible, and we consider this decision to be a tactical error."

"In the event that Xbox Next is not backward compatible, we think that the device will be very slow to grow its footprint. We think that Microsoft management has carefully considered the impact of eliminating backward compatibility, and we believe that the company is likely to proceed with a redesigned console."
 

DarienA

The black man everyone at Activision can agree on
DopeyFish said:
I remember people arguing all the time saying XboxLive would fail without 56k support. Anyone here remember that?

I remember reading about people arguing that man would never fly either...
 

Redbeard

Banned
I have a hard time believing that Microsoft will offer no bc solution at all. It may not be 'in' the Xbox 2, but couldn't it be an addon or something?

With huge games like Halo 2 only a year old by that time (and surely will still be played on Live), it's just too absurd a prospect.
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Rhindle, Allard himself has been queried about BC in recent interviews and his response has hardly been what I'd call enthusiastic support of BC. GI.biz is not the only site/publication for whom "prevailing wisdom" appears to be more and more likely that BC isn't in the the Xbox2. Considering that this could have a negative effect on sales of multiplatform titles for Xbox as these rumors catch on, you't think MS would want to go out of their to dispel them if they weren't true.
 
I don't believe GI.biz story. Some days ago J Allard said at http://www.computerandvideogames.com

Friday 11th June 2004 EXCLUSIVE: THE X-FACTOR, DAY FOUR

Are you looking at backwards compatibility for Xbox 2?

Allard: Of course we look at it. (...)


Would backwards-compatibility add a lot of expense to the unit cost?

Allard: (...) You've got to do what gamers want, and if they say that that's really important, we'll do it. Like DVD movie playback; that's important, we've got to do it.
 

IJoel

Member
I do think that considering Xbox 2 will be out for 6 months to a year before the PS2, it will be able to grow a somewhat considerable library in that time. Hopefully that will be enough to compete, and I'm guessing that is what MS is betting on.
 

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
human5892 said:
People say things will fail/succeed when they actually end up doing the opposite millions of times a year. It doesn't mean any one is particularly analogous to another, even if both scenarios in question involve the word "Xbox".

people argued that xbox would fail because it didn't have DC backwards compatibility.
people argued that xbox wouldn't get key publishers like EA, or Sega.
people argued that xbox would fail without keyboard & mouse support
people argued that XboxLive would fail without 56k support
people argued that XboxLive would fail without keyboard & mouse support (b/c of voice)

I'm surprised people aren't tired of the whole Xbox bashing bs.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
DopeyFish said:
I remember people arguing all the time saying XboxLive would fail without 56k support. Anyone here remember that?

I remember people arguing saying that NGage would flop and wouldn't be a real competitor to GBA. You remember that?
 

Rhindle

Member
kaching said:
Rhindle, Allard himself has been queried about BC in recent interviews and his response has hardly been what I'd call enthusiastic support of BC. GI.biz is not the only site/publication for whom "prevailing wisdom" appears to be more and more likely that BC isn't in the the Xbox2. Considering that this could have a negative effect on sales of multiplatform titles for Xbox as these rumors catch on, you't think MS would want to go out of their to dispel them if they weren't true.
I'm not saying that it will or will not end up being backwards compatible. No one knows at this point, not even MS -- because they are very much on the fence on the issue.

I'm simply commenting on the fact that Fahey makes about 3 articles a week about why MS is going to fail, full of "facts" for which he has no support other than his secret unnamed sources.
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
You've got to do what gamers want, and if they say that that's really important, we'll do it. Like DVD movie playback; that's important, we've got to do it.
However, in the latter part of that sentence he said that initial reports show that gamers don't really care about backwards compatilibility, and he did the same thing in absolutely every E3 interview that I've seen with him.
 

COCKLES

being watched
I don't think anyone really gives a toss about backwards compatbility to be honest. I'm buying a next-gen console for next-gen games - and let's face it. Xboxes will be so cheap by then, if you really want one, you'll get one for peanuts.
 

Ashitaka

Member
solarplexus said:
I don't believe GI.biz story. Some days ago J Allard said at http://www.computerandvideogames.com
snip...

If you're going to quote it, you should quote all of it:

Are you looking at backwards compatibility for Xbox 2?

Allard: Of course we look at it. What most gamers tell you though that what they want is new experience. Sony will trump that up as a huge feature. That's not why Sony won this generation at all. Let's be clear, the reason that they got off to such a good start was they played DVD movies and it was cheaper than any DVD player in Japan.

That's how they sold the first million units. It wasn't even the games, and the fact that they weren't contested - there was no competition for 18 months. It gave them a great headstart.

It wasn't backwards compatibility. The one thing that it gave Sony in the early stages was that it gave them a library. They had had really crappy games for the first six months, or twelve months, as people were trying to grapple with the hardware. There was really nothing worth playing.

So, like we did with Xbox one, we're going to focus on a killer launch line-up, and I think we'll have an ever better line-up for the next-gen than we did this time. If you have that, then what do you want to play?

Would backwards-compatibility add a lot of expense to the unit cost?

Allard: Well, if nothing else, it incurs complexity, complexity and focus. And do I want to make a huge compromise there? Not if I don't have to. You've got to do what gamers want, and if they say that that's really important, we'll do it. Like DVD movie playback; that's important, we've got to do it. I don't like the fact that I've got to spend money to do it and I have to devote resources to do it, but gamers have said that's an expectation for the console - do it.

They say it, we'll do it, but we're really going to make sure we ask the questions the right way, because it is a distraction for us and our early research suggests that it's not that important, but we'll see how it goes.

That makes it look a lot more like they aren't going with BC.
 
Top Bottom