GI.biz sez: No Xenon XBox Compatibility
- Thread starter Dave Baumann
- Start date
Polarbear53
Newcomer
How many people would actually use it. And if x2 supports HD-TV, no one is going to want to go back to 480p or I.
You guys aren't thinking about this in the right paradigm. PlayStation2 will, by the end of it's lifetime, shift abother few hundred million software titles. Any publisher looking at the PS2 platform knows that the majority of the software that will be sold on the platform has yet to come, between PS2 and PS3, the PlayStation2 platform will last as a viable format untill 2010, and perhaps 2015 untill it's totally over. The money has yet to come for publishers, the windfall is in the secondhalf of the lifetime.
Microsoft has effectively committed hara-kiri wrt the XBox platform. They're lack of comittement is indicative of their mindset; subsequently, I wouldn't be surprised to see XBox hardware production cease in 2005/2006.
Taken together with the larger 'strategy' Microsoft is seemingly embarking on and I don't anticipate much upside. 1999 was a good year.
PS. I need to unpack and get to work, I won't be able to respond untill later.
Microsoft has effectively committed hara-kiri wrt the XBox platform. They're lack of comittement is indicative of their mindset; subsequently, I wouldn't be surprised to see XBox hardware production cease in 2005/2006.
Taken together with the larger 'strategy' Microsoft is seemingly embarking on and I don't anticipate much upside. 1999 was a good year.
PS. I need to unpack and get to work, I won't be able to respond untill later.
Spidermate
Regular
I don't know about you people,buy I still play older games.For instance,I remember purchasing an older game that I didn't originally get before because it wasn't out for the console at the time.This was after I traded my older console in,by the way.
However,this doesn't have anything to do with me.It is clearly for marketing, mainly.If Microsoft's plans are to kill the original Xbox off early,then they do need backwards compatibility to retain their original fan base.This is what the big fuse is about.It might not matter to you,but to others,it is a different story.
However,this doesn't have anything to do with me.It is clearly for marketing, mainly.If Microsoft's plans are to kill the original Xbox off early,then they do need backwards compatibility to retain their original fan base.This is what the big fuse is about.It might not matter to you,but to others,it is a different story.
vb said:
It can be argued that backwards compatibility has the ability to make the transtition from a generation to the next smoother.
It is also attractive for all of those people without an Xbox, who could be motivated to get Xbox 2 so they could also play Xbox games. If it isn´t present, Xbox and Xbox2 stand as mutually exclusive machines for the average consumer.
marconelly!
Veteran
I don't know how significant it really is for the rest of the world, but the way I see it, importance of backwards compatibility is threefold:
1. It allows you to trade in your old console when buying the new one, where you save some money.
2. Gives a first time franchize buyer a a lot more value for his money (this is something MS should actually be a lot more concerned about than Sony even. Everyone and their mother will have a PS2, but if Microsoft wants to attract those buyers to themselves, they'd do good to have as large software library available as possible, otherwise why should anyone switch, when PS3 will have "all that, plus the old stuff I already have?").
3. Less clutter around your TV, as you keep one device less under it. This is actually the most important factor to me. I hate cable clutter, switchers, etc. and convinience is what consoles are supposed to be all about.
Benefit for the developers is obvious as it gives them even larger userbase to make their less expensive games for (if there's a little nice new, inovative puzzle game being made for PS2 in 2007, people with PS3 would buy it as well) It also gives them simple satisfaction of knowing that their games aren't all of a sudden become irrelevant - that they are preserved for years to come. I know historical preservation of games is probably not very high on Sony's bulletpoint list (then again, maybe it is - look at the Playstation history exhibition?) but it definitely ties in nicely with other benefits.
1. It allows you to trade in your old console when buying the new one, where you save some money.
2. Gives a first time franchize buyer a a lot more value for his money (this is something MS should actually be a lot more concerned about than Sony even. Everyone and their mother will have a PS2, but if Microsoft wants to attract those buyers to themselves, they'd do good to have as large software library available as possible, otherwise why should anyone switch, when PS3 will have "all that, plus the old stuff I already have?").
3. Less clutter around your TV, as you keep one device less under it. This is actually the most important factor to me. I hate cable clutter, switchers, etc. and convinience is what consoles are supposed to be all about.
Benefit for the developers is obvious as it gives them even larger userbase to make their less expensive games for (if there's a little nice new, inovative puzzle game being made for PS2 in 2007, people with PS3 would buy it as well) It also gives them simple satisfaction of knowing that their games aren't all of a sudden become irrelevant - that they are preserved for years to come. I know historical preservation of games is probably not very high on Sony's bulletpoint list (then again, maybe it is - look at the Playstation history exhibition?) but it definitely ties in nicely with other benefits.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
X86 CPU processor? gone
Nvidia graphics processor? gone
Harddrive? probably gone
backwards compatibility? also gone
Xenon is a fresh start. seems to be a true console format, not based on Intel/AMD PCs. I'm kinda glad
Nvidia graphics processor? gone
Harddrive? probably gone
backwards compatibility? also gone
Xenon is a fresh start. seems to be a true console format, not based on Intel/AMD PCs. I'm kinda glad
Vince said:
I don't agree. Backwards compatibility is not that big a deal; you wanna play old games, there's nothing stopping you from either buying or keeping an older console. I heard nobody bitch and whine when GC did not have an N64 cart slot on it for example, nor when N64 did not accept SNES carts just to mention two examples. Of course, using standard-size CD/DVD media makes it easier to make a format PHYSICALLY compatible, but really, what is backwards compatibility other than a little bit of convenience?
I can't imagine many people at all who'd refuse to buy a nextbox, ps2, revolution if any/all of these lacked backwards compatibility...
2015?!
On WHAT planet? If PS2 software is still available past 2010 I'd be very surprised. PS1 was phased out after a few years after all, now I don't see any games for sale unless it's second hand.We'll see. While it may look like lack of commitment to announce the successor will come so soon - relatively speaking - but we have yet to see any effects whatsoever in software announcements. Devs seem as enthusiastic as ever over the box.
You are hereby excused. We forgive you!
Megadrive1988
Veteran
I thought PSone's were still being produced, and will be until PS3 arrives.
thop said:Well PS1 games supposedly looked better on the PS2 because of some filtering, so i'm sure quite a few people stuck to their old games. Especially during the first 6-12 months which was a rather difficult time for PS2 owners (games wise) anyway
They looked a little better sometimes, though still so bad as to be thoroughly bested by the worst PS2 games. During the first 6 - 12 months most of the PS2 owners I knew just played DVD's or showed off Tekken Tag to their friends.
Whether people do buy old generation games (as new) for next gen machines is something I have no way of proving one way or another (though I think it would be very rare and make up only a very small proportion of last gen games sales). What I am pretty sure about though is that if PS3 has backwards compatability, and the Xbox 2 doesn't, it'll play against the Xbox 2 in terms of public perception.
Lack of backwards compatability rather than "inferioriority based on numbering" seems like a good reason to drop the name "Xbox 2" for Xenon.
Vince said:
Cleary Microsoft made a lot of blunders with the first generation of XBox hardware. Although "lack of commitment" doesn't come across to me. It's more like capitulation to how the market forces of the Video Game industry work. There was a reason why Nintendo built a hardware platform the way they did with the Gamecube, but Microsoft took a different approach and has gotten severely burned.
I'm curious on how Microsoft will handle a launch of XBox 2 in 2005. It's a short time frame between platforms and no backwards compatibility, so I wonder if they'll offer some type of incentive to XBox 1 owners to keep them loyal. Something like trade in you old Xbox and get $100 trade in credit towards Xbox 2 and a free year of LIVE service.
thop said:Well PS1 games supposedly looked better on the PS2 because of some filtering, so i'm sure quite a few people stuck to their old games. Especially during the first 6-12 months which was a rather difficult time for PS2 owners (games wise) anyway
Yeah...IMHO, backwards compatibility is an insurance policy for a next gen console launch with lacklustre launch titles. PS2s flew off the shelves at launch with mediocre software. Alot of early adopters bought the console to get a taste of next gen technology knowing full well that their favourite franchises would be just around the corner and they could still play their existing franchises on the PS2 (especially as PS2 improved some PS1 games with texture filtering). WIN WIN WIN...
And why can't XB2 be backwards compatible with XB1? Because of a difference in architecture? How different can the PS3 Cell architecture be from PS2s? Or PS2s from PS1s? I thought this big thing about M$ XNA abstraction was that hardware architecture was irrelavant. It's kinda funny that they can't keep compatability with their own platforms!
How will this affect existing XB live users? It seems like M$ is alienating it's current customers and starting with a cleansheet. Alot of current XB users have bought the system as it's the most powerfull, what's stopping existing XB users waiting for the PS3 as it's likely to be the most powerful? Will the XB frachises be strong enough to hold this off...? If XB2 only brings prettier grphics and doesn't add any additional features e.g. HD-DVD, then I see deja vu ala DC...
Similar threads
