-
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)
- Thread starter sonycowboy
- Start date
Deku Tree said:
because that would be an announcement.
durr durr durr
especially if it was in the works, and negotiations with nvidia and intel were in the works... one of those companies might not like the whole idea of dropping a bomb before it's time, or before they EVEN agree to it.
I am not going to read all of the posts in the topic... but I don't care about backwards compatibility...
Once I beat a game, I get rid of it... except for Ninja Gaiden... I want to play successive play...
and about 2 months before a new system will be launched for next generation... I get rid of all my old systems... that way I am excited about launch and ready to play games again...
I have done that forever...
Once I beat a game, I get rid of it... except for Ninja Gaiden... I want to play successive play...
and about 2 months before a new system will be launched for next generation... I get rid of all my old systems... that way I am excited about launch and ready to play games again...
I have done that forever...
TheGreenGiant
Banned
BojTrek said:
and you probably don't care because the xbox is not home to AAA+ rpgs that you can get back to and play and play again. That's the thing that many of the PS2/cube titles have going for them. They're accessible/fun and compelling. (And I single out RPG because this is one of those genres where gamers would go back in again to replay just for the hell of it).
BC is hugely important
BojTrek said:
so for two months you sit at home and masturbate in excitement? I'll be playing GAMES.
TheGreenGiant said:
I rarely replay RPGs because they're mostly tedious levelling up and combat, and the AAA+ rpgs you mention, I don't think they're that great to being with (I'm assuming you're talking final fantasy and stuff). I just use a guide to make sure I don't miss anything. For me for example, an online racing game or aircraft sim or a fighting game has infinite replayability, more so than any rpg, simply because you can always improve your skills in the game.
So Xbox games are not accessible/fun and compelling.. huh?
Saint Cornelius
Banned
I've been known to sit home for two months and masturbate out of excitement. I mean, it happens. Like July - September '99 *sighs longingly*
TheGreenGiant
Banned
you completely ignored my masturbation comment :|
I'm not saying anything about xbox games but all this applies to BC anyway so MS new console is kind of lacking (PR or not). RPGs are a classic brand of gaming and I use these for an example.. How many driving games are you going back to, to play once the next shinier edition comes out. I never touch PGR and my Rallisport 1 anymore. And as a result of shinier samey gameplay. I have lost pretty much all interests in picking the next game up. Same with countless FPS etc. RPGs have the distinctive advantage of their storyline which lends them some replayability. Even the ARPG ones like Zelda/Darkcloud are quite replayable.
How many fighters are on the XBox? PS2 is the better choice. but yeah.. this is about BC and not having it is detrimental to perception imo. Its a feature and a selling one. Not having it is BAD.
we'll see in the coming months how far MS is going to hedge on their XBOX2 early release working and how deep those pockets go.
I'm not saying anything about xbox games but all this applies to BC anyway so MS new console is kind of lacking (PR or not). RPGs are a classic brand of gaming and I use these for an example.. How many driving games are you going back to, to play once the next shinier edition comes out. I never touch PGR and my Rallisport 1 anymore. And as a result of shinier samey gameplay. I have lost pretty much all interests in picking the next game up. Same with countless FPS etc. RPGs have the distinctive advantage of their storyline which lends them some replayability. Even the ARPG ones like Zelda/Darkcloud are quite replayable.
How many fighters are on the XBox? PS2 is the better choice. but yeah.. this is about BC and not having it is detrimental to perception imo. Its a feature and a selling one. Not having it is BAD.
we'll see in the coming months how far MS is going to hedge on their XBOX2 early release working and how deep those pockets go.
Apharmd Battler
Member
Wow, this fourm is STILL talking about this?! I had no idea that backwards compatibility was such a hot button? I think the point has been debated long enough. Enough with the speculation we won't know anything until it's all official, and M$ aint telling anything before its time. What more can be said?
MightyHedgehog said:
Except for the fact that they're cutting short the current X-BOX by moving resources and projects to the next way too soon...but let's ignore that argument and continue with the BC stuff 'cos it's easier to call it a secondary un-needed feature rather than dodge the premature/less featured/under power next generation X-BOX issues.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
rastex said:
Because we still care about the feature and you obviously do not.
If PlayStation 3 did not offer backward-compatibility with PlayStation 2 then I would probably not buy it at launch.
I said probably because I would buy it later on probably: this is the same reasoning I will do about Xbox 2.
If Xbox 2 will be good, I will buy it... just probably not at launch.
You can make the point that so called "side-features" at the same price will help customers decide which console to buy: who cares if for example GCN 2 does 2 less pixel ops per cycle than Xbox 2 because GCN 2 is backward-compatible when each can do over 200 pixel ops per cycle ? At that point you look beyond graphics and you ask yourself: should I invest the money in other features or in matching their number of pixel ops per cycle.
Your theory would work if having had backward-compatibility in mind since the beginning would have meant a massive scale-back in performance of the system or the death of XNA or something that tragic. I do not think you can say that it would have made that much of an impact on performance.
Performance would not be dropped much especially if they thought things out to have either most if not all emulation being Software based or if they found a use for a Xbox 1 compatibility chip for Xbox 2 software which is the kind of approach Sony took succesfully with PlayStation 2 IMHO.
Then don't attempt to play off that sympathy in the first place by introducing a hypothetical situation that essentially amounts to asking the reader, "what would you do if you were in MS' shoes?"aaaaa0 said:
There's a third option - do both.
They want to be a major player in today's interactive entertainment industry and keep saying that it's all about the software, its all about the games, and yet they might produce hardware that writes off their existing library of content. If they're dumping BC, it's because they didn't initially plan well for their stay in the console marketplace and are unwilling to spend the money required to remedy their mistakes. That's a good reason?
Of course *you* would since *you* don't care much about BC in the first place. For others, a lack of BC would be an unfortunate handicap in order to rush to market. To be able to say you are the first to offer next gen graphics and gameplay is a fleeting advantage by itself in a market where the hardware stays in the retail channel for 4-6 yrs with little or no technological change. Because the meaningful lifespan of a console is longer than your average tech product, the "cutting edge" factor is of lesser value. A successful console doesn't even see the majority of its lifetime sales during its first year of retail life when it can still be considered technologically competitive with anything else on the market. Most people buy a console because it offers a stable and robust platform for interactive entertainment experiences so when you exclude BC, despite having the opportunity to offer it, you reduce the perception of robustness.
seems odd to say the least that a compnay cutting the life span of it's previous console so short ... esp considering a major title is due to be realsed this year .. wouldn't take advantage of BC.
might not be a make or break feature ...but in that situation ...seems like a mistake.
i don't own an xbox .... and i don't plan on buying one either - i own a ps2 .. and see more bang for my buck coming from the likes of ps2 assories the likes of that GT4 FF wheel ... and if i want better gfx ..i'll put that cash tiowards a cutting edge pc card instead.
BUT ...i'd still laike to play halo ... and halo2 ... eventually.
an option for halo is of course the PC version, if i upgrade my card .... but halo2 will still be out of reach for a while.
now if xbox2 had BC ... thne in addtion to the say 3 'decent' games u can expect at launch ... knowing that i could also get to play the likes of halo etc .... would be NICE.
sure 'last gen' games wouldn't have the flashy gfx of the new titles ...but esp for games belonging to a series ....it's certainly NICE to have the EASY option to play ..withnout having to drag a rented xbox home. which to this day i just haven't been arsed to do.
for eg after i played my fill of SSX and madden and TTT .... and with an eye to the aproching MGS2 ....i went and rented MGS ...... soley to catch up on the back story and that i would apreciate any titny plot details in the ps2 sequal when it arrived.
even more a point considering how important halo and halo 2 are to MS.
seems dumb. imo. ...... even more so considering they are planning to relase early.
might not be a make or break feature ...but in that situation ...seems like a mistake.
i don't own an xbox .... and i don't plan on buying one either - i own a ps2 .. and see more bang for my buck coming from the likes of ps2 assories the likes of that GT4 FF wheel ... and if i want better gfx ..i'll put that cash tiowards a cutting edge pc card instead.
BUT ...i'd still laike to play halo ... and halo2 ... eventually.
an option for halo is of course the PC version, if i upgrade my card .... but halo2 will still be out of reach for a while.
now if xbox2 had BC ... thne in addtion to the say 3 'decent' games u can expect at launch ... knowing that i could also get to play the likes of halo etc .... would be NICE.
sure 'last gen' games wouldn't have the flashy gfx of the new titles ...but esp for games belonging to a series ....it's certainly NICE to have the EASY option to play ..withnout having to drag a rented xbox home. which to this day i just haven't been arsed to do.
for eg after i played my fill of SSX and madden and TTT .... and with an eye to the aproching MGS2 ....i went and rented MGS ...... soley to catch up on the back story and that i would apreciate any titny plot details in the ps2 sequal when it arrived.
even more a point considering how important halo and halo 2 are to MS.
seems dumb. imo. ...... even more so considering they are planning to relase early.
I was watching G4techTV (Unscrewed) last night and there was this little message scrolling across the bottom of the screen about a miracle development in where emulation was possible on any system...it like was so outta nowhere and made no sense. Then right after it said "BREAKING NEWS" and then it said that Taito was bringing Bubble Pop to PSP like it was some killer app that would save it from doom or something and that there would be more details at TGS. Right after this came on I said alound "What The Fuck".
Also WTF...why is Mr Angry Face's "emblem" showing up in everyone else avatar's and why has no one said anything about it yet? It's hilarious, yet scary...
Also WTF...why is Mr Angry Face's "emblem" showing up in everyone else avatar's and why has no one said anything about it yet? It's hilarious, yet scary...
Besides the point, this topic is most fitting...
Anyways, BACK ON TOPIC, has anyone heard of this emulation thing at all 'cos it made it sound like what we've been arguing about was pointless as this simple solution would fix the problem. It just came outta nowhere and it made no sense, I think they gave the name of the company doing it, but I didn't catch it...did anyone see this last night?
Anyways, BACK ON TOPIC, has anyone heard of this emulation thing at all 'cos it made it sound like what we've been arguing about was pointless as this simple solution would fix the problem. It just came outta nowhere and it made no sense, I think they gave the name of the company doing it, but I didn't catch it...did anyone see this last night?
DrGAKMAN said:
I believe this is the info your looking for...
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/6754/Xbox-2-Backward-Compatibility-Update
THANKS for responding.
How come no one else has said anything about this...this is BIG news IMO! Does this new process involve hardware, or is this software related? If this is software then I could see MS just buying it and using it which means it wouldn't add too much to the cost of the next X-BOX at all. If it's hardware (which it doesn't look like) then how much would it add in price to the next X-BOX? How much more powerful would the next X-BOX have to be to use this new process to emulate the first X-BOX? And if BC is there, then they would have to put a HD in the next X-BOX (contrary to earlier reports that said it wouldn't) so that all the games would be compatible.
How come no one else has said anything about this...this is BIG news IMO! Does this new process involve hardware, or is this software related? If this is software then I could see MS just buying it and using it which means it wouldn't add too much to the cost of the next X-BOX at all. If it's hardware (which it doesn't look like) then how much would it add in price to the next X-BOX? How much more powerful would the next X-BOX have to be to use this new process to emulate the first X-BOX? And if BC is there, then they would have to put a HD in the next X-BOX (contrary to earlier reports that said it wouldn't) so that all the games would be compatible.
Right now I think MS is still trying to use Virtual PC (which they own) for backwards compatability. That way they don't have to pay for licensing fees.
I'm sure Transistive's software will work just fine, but AFAIK there is no deal between MS and Transistive. It sounds like the CEO is targeting the gaming media to get MS's attention.
Either way, I'm confident MS will have a solution for BC. I'm sure it will have limitations though, but at least they can say they have it. I know Tecmo does a lot of coding down to the metal and there is no way a software solution will suffice. But for your average Renderware game, it(emulation) should be ok.
I'm sure Transistive's software will work just fine, but AFAIK there is no deal between MS and Transistive. It sounds like the CEO is targeting the gaming media to get MS's attention.
Either way, I'm confident MS will have a solution for BC. I'm sure it will have limitations though, but at least they can say they have it. I know Tecmo does a lot of coding down to the metal and there is no way a software solution will suffice. But for your average Renderware game, it(emulation) should be ok.
Fight for Freeform said:
The reality is, a well designed console should offer BC without incurring into a significant increase of production costs.
If it has such a tradeoff, then is a poorly designed item, and your money might be better spent on something else. As simple as that.
You are watching the situation from the wrong perspective, that of the fan that starts from the assumption that he WANTS TO BUY the item, even overlooking some flaws, and chooses which flaws are most acceptable.
Joe Randomguy - assuming he has a cool mind - will look at it from the opposite perspective: will buy the item ONLY if it meets his standards.
Which may well include: reasonable price AND backwards compatibility.
Seriously, no BC means poor design of the hardware and reduced value.
No BC because it would be expensive means the same: poor design of the hardware and reduced value.
Telling yourself that is ok to not have BC, to save money or whatever other reason, doesn't make this flaw any less significant.
In the end of the day, Xenon might offer less than the other consoles, so your money may be better spent elsewhere. Thats all that matters.
Buffy4ever
Banned
MightyHedgehog said:
MS needs BC on the X box 2. I am not going to buy one if the x box 2 is not BC. I like playing all my x box sega games and I won't have to hook up my old system. And what happen if the old x box goes out, and like lot of people said it is nice not having all that clutter under the TV.
Duckhuntdog
Member
Hey guys, what's going on over here..... uh oh. Someone better warn the sites with the damage control pics, their bandwidth is about to skyrocket.
open_mouth_
insert_foot_
BC is worthless to me cause I wouldn't ever sell my modded Xbox anyway.
mrklaw:
> Do you think MS wants to be the first company for a couple of generations to try that out?
GameCube. You could argue that the lack of backwards compatibility is what has stopped it from becoming successful but we both know that isn't the case. You could also argue that it uses a different medium than the previous Nintendo consoles but PS2 also uses a different medium from PS1 (I know CDs are also supported). Yes, both CD and DVD are optical formats but the DC wasn't compatible with Saturn just like Saturn wasn't compatible with Genesis/Mega Drive/Sega CD/Mega CD. Or N64 wasn't backwards compatible with SNES or NES. And while many of these systems weren't terribly successful you certainly can't say that about SNES.
Making Xbox 2 backwards compatible isn't trivial and I think M$ believes that the benifits aren't worth the engineering effort.
P90:
> It is BIG for me. The success of the PS2 and GBA seems to point that maybe BC is BIG
> for the masses that don't post on forums.
Well, I think GBA is different being a portable machine and somewhat more affordable than a console. But I think you're right that backwards compatibility has helped both systems at least initially. Neither system had spectacular launches software wise but both were sort of the defacto standard within their segment. Backwards compatibility gave the early adopters who bought the systems just because they were a new GB or PS something to play while the software library was being built up. But the Xbox isn't a market leader and can't rely on its name to move hardware. M$ has to launch the system with some amazing software to become the dominant player and if they have that software backwards compatibility won't matter.
> Do you think MS wants to be the first company for a couple of generations to try that out?
GameCube. You could argue that the lack of backwards compatibility is what has stopped it from becoming successful but we both know that isn't the case. You could also argue that it uses a different medium than the previous Nintendo consoles but PS2 also uses a different medium from PS1 (I know CDs are also supported). Yes, both CD and DVD are optical formats but the DC wasn't compatible with Saturn just like Saturn wasn't compatible with Genesis/Mega Drive/Sega CD/Mega CD. Or N64 wasn't backwards compatible with SNES or NES. And while many of these systems weren't terribly successful you certainly can't say that about SNES.
Making Xbox 2 backwards compatible isn't trivial and I think M$ believes that the benifits aren't worth the engineering effort.
P90:
> It is BIG for me. The success of the PS2 and GBA seems to point that maybe BC is BIG
> for the masses that don't post on forums.
Well, I think GBA is different being a portable machine and somewhat more affordable than a console. But I think you're right that backwards compatibility has helped both systems at least initially. Neither system had spectacular launches software wise but both were sort of the defacto standard within their segment. Backwards compatibility gave the early adopters who bought the systems just because they were a new GB or PS something to play while the software library was being built up. But the Xbox isn't a market leader and can't rely on its name to move hardware. M$ has to launch the system with some amazing software to become the dominant player and if they have that software backwards compatibility won't matter.
jedimike said:
Don't wanna piss on the kick MS while they're down parade, but I think people missed this post. There is a company (at that link) claiming that they can offer emulation (thus BC) for just about any hardware. It sounds unbelievable that a PowerPC/ATi "Xenon" would be able to play a Intel/nVidia specific, but they specialize in emulation on different OS's & different chipsets so all this talk about BC in this thread may have been pointless 'cos "Xenon" could still end up with it if true.
Also, I'm going to repost what I wrote before that people seemed to ignore:
"How come no one else has said anything about this...this is BIG news IMO! Does this new process involve hardware, or is this software related? If this is software then I could see MS just buying it and using it which means it wouldn't add too much to the cost of the next X-BOX at all. If it's hardware (which it doesn't look like) then how much would it add in price to the next X-BOX? How much more powerful would the next X-BOX have to be to use this new process to emulate the first X-BOX? And if BC is there, then they would have to put a HD in the next X-BOX (contrary to earlier reports that said it wouldn't) so that all the games would be compatible."
CrimsonSkies
Member
Well it's a risk. The other companies that want to do it are sinking an investment and development time into their units to pull it off. Time and money that could be used to improve their system.
I personally would rather the system be more powerful than worry about backwards compatability. However, I do suspect that folks on boards such as this one will be dissapointed.
I personally would rather the system be more powerful than worry about backwards compatability. However, I do suspect that folks on boards such as this one will be dissapointed.
element
Member
I wouldn't say that. At least not for the new hardware. If Xenon doesn't have BC, it will be due to the poor hardware decision that were made on the Xbox, not Xenon. MS isn't really isn't cutting costs on Xenon as many people think they are. They are signing significantly better deals this time, that in the long run will save them money compared to how the hardware deals for the Xbox have been.
kitchenmotors
Banned
I believe that a lot of casual gamers, who normally don't spend tons of money each month on games, would see BC as a good thing. This means they can trade in their old system towards a new one, which is something places like EB Game and Gamestop push in your face. It also means that if Xbox 2 has a short coming, Sony and Nintendo may take advantage of it, like pushing budget releases to the forefront that use older technology (RE4, GT4 or Celda/Zelda engine anyone?) and smaller budgets.
Here's what happened...
In an interview with Gameindustry.biz, J. Allard downplayed BC. But he is the hardware guy, and he was speaking from a gamer perspective. Less than 10% of PS2 users used it...blah,blah,blah
Then there was an interview with a Nvidia mucky muck, who said there would be infringement rights or something like that
So people just assumed BC was out the window. Since then, MS has stated that Xenon is powerful enough to emulate Xbox and that they are working on a solution.... although they would have to weigh the cost to benefit. And that they will do what gamers want.
Also, MS chastised Gameindustry and other media for poor reporting. We know they bought the company behind VirtualPC, we know the Xbox team is working on Virtual PC projects, and we also know that this other company has a solution.
Also, Wedbush (an industry analyst company) gave very strong unfavorable comments about any lack of BC by Microsoft. There is also a strong internet petition (over 20,000 signatures) requesting BC.
So basically, people believe what they want to believe. On GAF, it seems like most people believe that Xenon will not be BC. I'm in the minority here, but I think that MS got the point and will include BC. The perception of inherent value will outweigh the cost.
...On the hard drive.
Same type of thing. In an interview, MS was revealing that the hard drive cost them too much money. People automatically assumed that Xenon will have no hard drive... which is probably true.
...BUT , that doesn't exclude other mass storage devices. No hard drive does not mean no downloadable content, custom soundtracks, or unlimited saves. It just means that MS is using a different approach.
Once again, we know that a mass storage company is working with MS on Xenon. We know that XBL is carrying over to Xenon. and we know that developers want that scratch pad.
Trust me, MS will have something built into Xenon that will function better than the Xbox hard drive.
In an interview with Gameindustry.biz, J. Allard downplayed BC. But he is the hardware guy, and he was speaking from a gamer perspective. Less than 10% of PS2 users used it...blah,blah,blah
Then there was an interview with a Nvidia mucky muck, who said there would be infringement rights or something like that
So people just assumed BC was out the window. Since then, MS has stated that Xenon is powerful enough to emulate Xbox and that they are working on a solution.... although they would have to weigh the cost to benefit. And that they will do what gamers want.
Also, MS chastised Gameindustry and other media for poor reporting. We know they bought the company behind VirtualPC, we know the Xbox team is working on Virtual PC projects, and we also know that this other company has a solution.
Also, Wedbush (an industry analyst company) gave very strong unfavorable comments about any lack of BC by Microsoft. There is also a strong internet petition (over 20,000 signatures) requesting BC.
So basically, people believe what they want to believe. On GAF, it seems like most people believe that Xenon will not be BC. I'm in the minority here, but I think that MS got the point and will include BC. The perception of inherent value will outweigh the cost.
...On the hard drive.
Same type of thing. In an interview, MS was revealing that the hard drive cost them too much money. People automatically assumed that Xenon will have no hard drive... which is probably true.
...BUT , that doesn't exclude other mass storage devices. No hard drive does not mean no downloadable content, custom soundtracks, or unlimited saves. It just means that MS is using a different approach.
Once again, we know that a mass storage company is working with MS on Xenon. We know that XBL is carrying over to Xenon. and we know that developers want that scratch pad.
Trust me, MS will have something built into Xenon that will function better than the Xbox hard drive.
Listen to him people...there's STILL hope that BC will be included in the next X-BOX.
I pretty much dogged MS for possibly not including the feature, but if they LISTENED to the masses and they are making strides to include it and (going by that link jedimike posted) it seems quite possible it may be included then I will be the first to say that I was wrong and that "Xenon" can be a major player next generation. I'm not saying that BC is *that* important, it's just the fact that the perception around such a feature not included in a system would be a major negative to that system.
I still don't think it's wise for them to take away one of their biggest selling points this generation (the power "edge") by coming out first, nor do I think a premature move to the next generation is something we want...plus I think it may be hurtful if they can't include a next generation disc format (higher capacity, makes ports easier, faster data flow, etc.), but by making strides to include BC it shows that they're listenning and not skimping on features. I say they have much better chances with it, then they do without it.
I pretty much dogged MS for possibly not including the feature, but if they LISTENED to the masses and they are making strides to include it and (going by that link jedimike posted) it seems quite possible it may be included then I will be the first to say that I was wrong and that "Xenon" can be a major player next generation. I'm not saying that BC is *that* important, it's just the fact that the perception around such a feature not included in a system would be a major negative to that system.
I still don't think it's wise for them to take away one of their biggest selling points this generation (the power "edge") by coming out first, nor do I think a premature move to the next generation is something we want...plus I think it may be hurtful if they can't include a next generation disc format (higher capacity, makes ports easier, faster data flow, etc.), but by making strides to include BC it shows that they're listenning and not skimping on features. I say they have much better chances with it, then they do without it.
Alcibiades
Member
I also think XBox will have backwards compatibility, to extend the life of Halo/Halo 2 as much as possible...
The trade-off (even if they have to strike a deal with NVidia) would be offset for sure by the advantages (value in consumers eyes, even if only 2.4 million out of 24 million PS2's user use it, and the extended lifeline for XBox 1 products.
jediMike, you're not the only one, I also agree. Press reports about PS3 being able to play PS2 games do affect consumer mindset. In fact, I think XBox BC is pretty much a given at this point.
The company I'm worried about not doing it is Nintendo, because they really like to have distinct products and sometimes worry about consumer confusion (kinda like how we stopped seeing N64 controllers practically before the launch of GCN). I'm surprised they gave DS backwards compatibility, but maybe if the solution is cheap enough, they'll follow through with GCN BC for Revolution.
I know Iwata hinted that the Revolution could play some current generation games or something like that, but it was still a confusing statement and they also intended online games for GCN, so basically it's going to come down to making business sense, and seeing even just a couple million people take advantage of feature (probably way more I don't know where Microsoft got their estimates from) on PS2, the evidence seems convincing that it's important.
The trade-off (even if they have to strike a deal with NVidia) would be offset for sure by the advantages (value in consumers eyes, even if only 2.4 million out of 24 million PS2's user use it, and the extended lifeline for XBox 1 products.
jediMike, you're not the only one, I also agree. Press reports about PS3 being able to play PS2 games do affect consumer mindset. In fact, I think XBox BC is pretty much a given at this point.
The company I'm worried about not doing it is Nintendo, because they really like to have distinct products and sometimes worry about consumer confusion (kinda like how we stopped seeing N64 controllers practically before the launch of GCN). I'm surprised they gave DS backwards compatibility, but maybe if the solution is cheap enough, they'll follow through with GCN BC for Revolution.
I know Iwata hinted that the Revolution could play some current generation games or something like that, but it was still a confusing statement and they also intended online games for GCN, so basically it's going to come down to making business sense, and seeing even just a couple million people take advantage of feature (probably way more I don't know where Microsoft got their estimates from) on PS2, the evidence seems convincing that it's important.
Pana speaks the wisest words here. He didn't say "I won't buy a PS3 or Xbox2" he says at "launch" All you people who say you wont buy it because it won't have BC are way over reacting. maybe at launch you won't buy one but two years after the system is out are you still going to to complain that said system doesn't have BC?
element
Member
I think people forget that the novelty of backward compatibility wears off real quick when you have awesome new games to play with better graphics and sound.quin said:
BC is strange, because people say casual gamers want it. Yet most of the games casual gamers buy will come out with new versions on the new system. So if someone has the option to play GTA:SA or a PS3 GTA, they are going to want to play the PS3 GTA far more then the GTA:SA if even if they already own GTA:SA and don't own the PS3 GTA, or Madden 2004 vs Madden 2005.
open_mouth_
insert_foot_
"La la la la... I can't hear you...."
BC would be great since I could get some money off a $300 system at launch. I'm never, never paying for a $300 system ever again, but if I could get some cash for the new one, that would really help. I'm one of the people who never had a PSX, so when I got the PS2 I had the chance to catch up with all the classics I'd missed. Xbox is my least played system as well, so when Perfect Dark Zero comes out for Xenon/Xbox 2, I would be able to catch up on all the games I'd missed as they'd be much cheaper.
Just on a personal level, I won't get an Xbox 2 at launch if it lacks BC (this is true of any system, really). I think it's a good thing for a smooth transition into the next console though, so my Xbox I bought last March isn't guaranteed to be dead next year at this time.
Just on a personal level, I won't get an Xbox 2 at launch if it lacks BC (this is true of any system, really). I think it's a good thing for a smooth transition into the next console though, so my Xbox I bought last March isn't guaranteed to be dead next year at this time.
I think that this is a great move by Microsoft.
The best case scenario for BC is having the Xenon hardware emulate the original Xbox. Since it could not be done without problems, they scrapped it.
Including the original Xbox hardware would have been stupid, and I need not bother go into the reasons as to why, it's pretty apparent.
Now it's time to focus on making a great next generation console.
*thumbs up*
People bought their PS2s, their GameCubes, and their Xboxes to play the latest games.
The best case scenario for BC is having the Xenon hardware emulate the original Xbox. Since it could not be done without problems, they scrapped it.
Including the original Xbox hardware would have been stupid, and I need not bother go into the reasons as to why, it's pretty apparent.
Now it's time to focus on making a great next generation console.
*thumbs up*
People bought their PS2s, their GameCubes, and their Xboxes to play the latest games.
element said:
It never wore off on my GB. I still have GB carts that I occasionally play. It is a rarely used utility, but the perception of value is huge. Especially during launch when you only have a handful of games to choose from. Also, XBL puts a kink in the works because online games can live forever (see Counter Strike, Starcraft, etc.)
element said:
What about the guy who wants to play Kung Fu Chaos or Panzer Dragoon Orta? These are unique games that have ever lasting appeal with no sequels in sight. Most of us probably don't care on way or the other, but Sony made such a big deal out of it this gen, so we put a higher value on it.
The marketing is key. How many people buy a pro-scan DVD player, but have no clue what pro-scan is and don't have the TV to support it? Lots. Why? Perceived value. People want to know they are getting more for less.
The perception in the gaming community is that the value of a console rises or falls with backwards compatability.
Consider that BC for consoles like the GameBoy and PlayStation make more sense, because the userbase for each console was so massive to begin with.
The Xbox and GC's userbases aren't that big to begin with.
If the PS3 supported Betamax...that wouldn't make sense. Sure, BC for that would be kinda nifty, but how many users would take advantage of it? Will it create a large enough spike in Betamax sales to make financial sense?
You gotta think about these things.
The Xbox and GC's userbases aren't that big to begin with.
If the PS3 supported Betamax...that wouldn't make sense. Sure, BC for that would be kinda nifty, but how many users would take advantage of it? Will it create a large enough spike in Betamax sales to make financial sense?
You gotta think about these things.
Duckhuntdog
Member
element said:
Which translates into cutting costs. What a wicked game semantics plays.
Fight for Freeform said:
No, it made sense because they were using the same medium and the value of the PS2 and GBA/GBC increased significantly with little investment.
20 Million is pretty damn big. It's a great way to link your current customers with your new machine. Why do you think it was so easy for people not to buy a GC. There's a clean break without BC. It's much easier to retain existing customers if you can give what they already have more value.
And why doesn't Xbox play cassette tapes? Crap, my microwave didn't come with a built in toaster. My fucking car doesn't mow the lawn.
Sometimes you just have to think.
Similar threads
- Poll