[ERP]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

What about the SEGA BC devices for carts? Did they have anything more than just a slot conversion?

They were justa slot conversion, the "audio processor" was the CPU from a Master System and the graphics chip could be initialized in Master System mode.

[Shifty Geezer]

So hardware BC has always been internal to the main system. I guess in the Olden Days using the old hardware as an audio processor or somesuch made it a worthwhile inclusion, but we're past that point now (and XB360 tagged onto Durango just to handle IO is a bit excessive ). I do feel the add-on is the smartest route now. Shrink the gubbins, stick 'em on a PCIe card. The only obvious issues for me are cooling and what the added cost to the base unit would be to support an optional BC upgrade.

[function]

Originally Posted by ERP

They were justa slot conversion, the "audio processor" was the CPU from a Master System and the graphics chip could be initialized in Master System mode.

I believe you can build your own converter (but you'd probably need to rip a MS cart connector out). There were actually two converters come to think of it - one that was just for carts and the more well known converter that was for carts and cards.

At least one Master System game - Phantasy Star - had a Megadrive release. AFAIK it was the exact same binary as the Master System version, just in a Megadrive cart. It may even used the same chips, just on a Megadrive cart PCB with the chip pinouts routed to the appropriate places.

[upnorthsox]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

So hardware BC has always been internal to the main system. I guess in the Olden Days using the old hardware as an audio processor or somesuch made it a worthwhile inclusion, but we're past that point now (and XB360 tagged onto Durango just to handle IO is a bit excessive ). I do feel the add-on is the smartest route now. Shrink the gubbins, stick 'em on a PCIe card. The only obvious issues for me are cooling and what the added cost to the base unit would be to support an optional BC upgrade.

Yep, cooling should be no more/worse than any other midrange gpu card. I'd want to see it as a snap-on extender so it then adds on 3.5-4" on the width of the ps4/720. I'd think as a stand alone accessory at $99 it would be a money maker for either of them. Put it in a bundle and it'd still be worth your while.

[Prophecy2k]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

So hardware BC has always been internal to the main system. I guess in the Olden Days using the old hardware as an audio processor or somesuch made it a worthwhile inclusion, but we're past that point now (and XB360 tagged onto Durango just to handle IO is a bit excessive ). I do feel the add-on is the smartest route now. Shrink the gubbins, stick 'em on a PCIe card. The only obvious issues for me are cooling and what the added cost to the base unit would be to support an optional BC upgrade.

I dunno, putting the current Xenos/Xenon on Durango would be abit of a boon if MS was willing to do it.

They could run the entire OS, all services, sound, Kinect and anything else they wanted to run on it, leaving all the new Durango HW to handle only the game stuff. Enabling also BC without them having to put in any effort to write software emulation layers, would be quite a nice little addition to the Durango provided the 360 chip could be manufactured small enough hand cheaply enough.

[jonabbey]

Originally Posted by upnorthsox

Yep, cooling should be no more/worse than any other midrange gpu card. I'd want to see it as a snap-on extender so it then adds on 3.5-4" on the width of the ps4/720. I'd think as a stand alone accessory at $99 it would be a money maker for either of them. Put it in a bundle and it'd still be worth your while.

I'd definitely pick one up. My shortly-after-launch PS3's ability to host and run PS1 and PS2 games straight off the XMB with full memory card emulation is really nice, and I'd be pleased as hell to go another generation like that.

As a side question, do folks here think porting games from PS3 to some hypothetical x86/DirectX PS4 is likely to be harder or easier than porting from PS2 to PS3?

PS2 to PS3 obviously involves a lot of tricky graphics pipeline reworking, while PS3 to PS4 will require more work on CPU than on GPU, presumably.

[Shifty Geezer]

What do you mean by port? Remake?

[jonabbey]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

What do you mean by port? Remake?

Sorry, remake, remaster, yes.

[Shifty Geezer]

Probably not as bad as PS2 > PS3, which needs a complete rewrite. It'd be a lot of work though (assuming x86 cores in PS4. RSX code should be relatively easy to port unless devs get very lowdown with it).

[owen]

Since I was late to this thread I will some up by opinions below;

For me BC affects all my purchases. BC only came relevant in the age of CDs and DVD. Its one of the reason I buy SD cards and USB devices. I will NEVER buy a Vita. I am usually one generation behind in video games because the old games are cheap and I know right away which games are worth playing and I can just buy them all at one time and play them through at my own pace.

Now as the 360 is coming to the end of its life cycle "die dam it!", I will pick it up soon but if the 720 had good BC I would pick that up instead since it would allow me to play the games I missed and also play anything new and fantastic that comes out. So if the 720 costs $400 at launch and a 360 costs $200 then I would spend the extra money just to have my cake and eat it too.

Now I am playing the the ps2 backlog, games are easy to get and are good quality. I'll never buy a ps3 because the entire catalogue of the ps3 pales in comparison to ps2/ps1 there is simply no reason to buy the console TODAY when the xbox360 is just as good, the ps2 is cheaper and has a better library of hundreds of hours of playtime. This is the problem consoles without BC will face. Why would somebody spend more money to get LESS content? Why would somebody give up disk media for cloud media that expires? Why would someone in the age of iphones and ipods give up all their old software when the controllers are all the same?

To me it seems;
PS2 had BC = PS1 instant death. PS2 sells millions.
PS3 no BC = PS2 still outselling ps3. PS3 slow burn.
Wii BC = gamecube instant death. Wii Sells millions.
360 BC = old xbox regulated to hardcore players only
WiiU has BC = unknown

A key feature of BC is also the controllers, memory cards, guitars and other hardware. When the ps3 came out I was like "WTF do I do with my 4 ps2 controllers and memory cards? ITS THE SAME CONTROLLER!!". I know Sony loves to screw it customers but at least the ports were still the same in the ps1>ps2 era. Not supporting old controllers to me is one of the biggest wastes of our modern age. The wii did it right even though they didn't go as far as they could.

Every x on the feature list of a new console is another reason for people not to buy it and another missed opportunity. It is no longer enough to just give people "like me" a shiny new system promising the same games with more polygons. You have to give people new experiences or they won't see the value in spending more money to play the same game. We need less "call of dutys" and more "Icos".

[AlphaWolf]

Call of duty probably makes more money for them than all of the $10 games combined.

As for the rest of your argument, how much should they care about the discount only buyer? How much will they make off of you?

[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by owen

Now I am playing the the ps2 backlog, games are easy to get and are good quality. I'll never buy a ps3 because the entire catalogue of the ps3 pales in comparison to ps2/ps1 there is simply no reason to buy the console TODAY when the xbox360 is just as good, the ps2 is cheaper and has a better library of hundreds of hours of playtime. This is the problem consoles without BC will face. Why would somebody spend more money to get LESS content?

Because it's better quality content. id the PS3 games were identical ot PS2 games, you'd have a point. But there's lots PS3 is doing that PS2 can't that results in better games. GT5 is better than GT4. FIFA 2012 on PS3 is better than FIFA 2012 on PS2. Killzone is better on PS3 than PS2. For those who want better experiences, they buy the later hardware. For those who don't feel the new experience is any better than the old, or not worth the asking price, then they can stay with the old, either keeping their old console or buying a second hand one cheap etc.

[almighty]

Guys just got a 360 and would really like to play some old games like MGS2, Silent Hill and a few others...

Hows the BC on 360? Does it render games at native 720p or should I consider emulation?

[AlStrong]

480p games run with 4xMSAA and are then upscaled. Depending on the game, you may run into bugs here and there. I haven't used it much beyond Conker, DOAU, MechAssault 2, Unreal Championship 2, which were ok. Can't remember how Kingdom Under Fire: Crusaders/Heroes performed. The only games that were particularly buggy were Halo 1 & 2, but that's kind of moot unless you were looking for co-op.

[bkilian]

Also a number of games were never supported with BC, Kingdom Under Fire rings a bell there.

[AlStrong]

Ah right. Heroes wasn't, but Crusaders was. Kind of odd considering Heroes was more or less the same with different campaigns.

Ninja Gaiden Black was pretty decent all-considering (widescreen support too). The 4xMSAA is nice. Can't remember the framerate well. Don't remember it being bad.

[bkilian]

Fable and Jade Empire played well with BC too. Jade Empire still being one of my all time favourite games.

[tuna]

Originally Posted by almighty

Guys just got a 360 and would really like to play some old games like MGS2, Silent Hill and a few others...

Hows the BC on 360? Does it render games at native 720p or should I consider emulation?

Wouldn't the HD remasters play much better?

[I.S.T.]

Originally Posted by bkilian

Fable and Jade Empire played well with BC too. Jade Empire still being one of my all time favourite games.

Fable may have, but Fable: TLC(AKA the only Fable 1 version worth buying) did not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_36...patible_titles

Best to play that on PC, really.

[N2O]

And about BC
Right now MS tested 200+ 360 games run on Durango,about 80% can play on Durango,others need patch or they will give up .

Originally Posted by Prophecy2k

What's this N2O?

Do you have a source or are you just speculating based on existing rumours?

First line is my guess based on AMD china guy source.
Second line is my source,i know a MS guy but he never told me any important part.

[DieH@rd]

Originally Posted by N2O

And about BC
Right now MS tested 200+ 360 games run on Durango,about 80% can play on Durango,others need patch or they will give up .

I never heard this kind of rumor before, so I presume you are knowing this from your own sources.

Also, I dont see why would they give up if 80% works great. They just need to slap "beta" sign on BC software and market will accept limited library access.

[N2O]

Originally Posted by DieH@rd

I never heard this kind of rumor before, so I presume you are knowing this from your own sources.

Also, I dont see why would they give up if 80% works great. They just need to slap "beta" sign on BC software and market will accept limited library access.

I mean give up the 20% games can't run on Durango

[XpiderMX]

Software based backward compatibility? I hope with some enhancements.

[ERP]

Originally Posted by N2O

I mean give up the 20% games can't run on Durango

Sounds like a support nightmare to me, unless they are just reselling the compatible titles on the new console, how does a 720 purchaser know which bits of his existing library are compatible?
While a lot of posters on this board might understand partial backwards compatibility, I'm not sure that the average 360 owner is sophisticated enough to understand it.

[N2O]

Originally Posted by ERP

how does a 720 purchaser know which bits of his existing library are compatible?

Maybe they will make a list,just like they made "which XBOX games can run on 360" list.