No backward compatibility for Xbox 2.

[Derrik Draven]

Not really sure where the article is...it's online so, I'm sure some of the more online prolific guys here could post a link.

 

I read that J. Allard is saying, at this point, that it doesn't look like the XBox 2 (or whatever it will be called), will have backwards compatibility.

 

I've read the pros/cons of this subject and, I can't help but feel that it would hurt sales of the new console, and that Microsoft would be later admitting that they made a mistake not including it. So, include it and not have to admit to a mistake!

 

From my point of view, being reasonably able to afford most of what I want, I still don't like the idea of having to have yet another rack space taken up by my current Xbox and, whatever the Big M puts out in a couple of years.

 

Small price to pay I guess but, the convenience of having it done by 1 box can't be overstated enough.

 

It certainly didn't hurt the PS2 when it launched, did it? I bought that thing the night it was released and I don't remember anyone bitching that they were pissed because it COULD play all their older games.

 

Still...it's so early that none of this is written in stone. Who knows what the successor to the Xbox will do or, what it's architecture will look like.

 

What do you guys think? You guys give a shit about b/c (backward compat) or not?

 

Put me on the side of the room that want's b/c. :tu:

[Starhawk]

I've never been that concerned over backwards compatibility when it comes to game consoles. It might be because Im just used to them NOT being backwards compatible. But I've always thought that if you wanted to play XBOX games you would play them on your XBOX. If I had an XBOX 2 I'm sure I'd be focused on the new games for that generation.

 

It's a nice feature to have, sure, but I wont miss it (and for some reason, I dont think the general public will either). I especially wouldnt want it included if it affected the development of the new system (like if they had to make cutbacks to keep the compatibility in place).

[Darius]

I think backwards compatibility is great from a sales standpoint. When I worked at circuit city a few years back I sold many ps2's when people came in looking for ps1's and dvd players. I know the dvd player isn't as good but most were looking at low end dvd players anyhow. It seems like the xbox would be one of the easiest to do backwards compatibility on since its all pc -hardware and a tweaked version of direct x.

 

As for PS2 and backwards compatibility when I first got the PS2 at launch I don't think I played many PS2 games in it. At the time I was playing gran turismo 2 and tony hawk pro skater 1 and 2. Just like all new systems the games were more or less crap for the first year.

[Beer Monkey]

While compatibility won't keep me from buying a system that I want, I think not having it is a bad idea.

 

The main stuff I'd want to go back and play is the killer offline stuff like JSRF and Panzer Dragoon Orta. I've got a second XBox for emus, media and stuff, so I'd still have that for the 'oldies'. The online stuff, I generally am probably not going to go back and play something from four years ago (because I'm too busy playing newer stuff), so at a certain point I don't mind moving forward and leaving some things behind.

 

This whole scenario is making me think two things:

 

1) The new ATI chipset can't emulate/simulate the old NVidia chipset at full speed or for legal reasons they can't copy the entire functionality of the old NVidia chipset.

 

2) No hard drive in XBox 2. That would pretty much kill backward compatibility.

[secretvampire]

The new ATI chipset can't emulate/simulate the old NVidia chipset at full speed or for legal reasons they can't copy the entire functionality of the old NVidia chipset.

 

Now THAT is something I hadn't thought of that seems like a very logical explanation. I mean the no hard drive thing, having a big flash memory card could surely take care of most of the hard drive functions, but the graphics instruction set...that is potentially a much larger hurdle.

[Chris F]

Doesn't bother me in the least. Sure it's a nice feature for the PS2, but I hardly use that functionality, and if it didn't have that feature, I'd go out and buy a PSOne for cheap so I can get my Final Fantasy fix.

 

No backwards compatibility is not a deal breaker for me, especially since I keep my game systems now, and I've figured from the start that with ATI on board for Xbox 2 graphics, there would probably be issues emulating the current nVidia system.

[Robot Monkey]

Like, Derrik, I would prefer not to take up more space and would therefore appreciate backwards compatibility in the Xbox 2.

 

God knows, if MS continues the size trend of the original Xbox I would need to reinforce the floor before putting in an Xbox 2 alongside the Xbox.

 

Still, it certainly isn't a deal-breaker for me. I'd like to see compatibility for marketing reasons, though. Whether we use it or not, it seems to be expected to a degree these days (I'm thinking of the PS2, PS3 and GBA here). The GameCube doesn't have it, but it always had a lower price point than the other current gen consoles.

 

-j

[Beer Monkey]

I mean the no hard drive thing, having a big flash memory card could surely take care of most of the hard drive functions

 

The flash would have to be a lot smaller or the price would go through the roof.

 

If you didn't allow custom soundtracks it might work. You'd at least have to make it large enough to support lots and lots of downloaded content...remember, people are paying for those golf courses and Pandora levels.

 

They might be able to get away with 1GB of flash instead of an 8GB hard drive if you drop the custom soundtracks.

 

My main theory is the video chipset.

[hollismb]

I still would like it for a few reasons. One, I won't be buying an XBOX 2 until there's a game I must have. With backwards compatability, I wouldn't even think about it, and I'd just buy one. I mean, I'm sure I'll still be playing Halo 2, for example, until there's the inevitable Halo 3.

 

Two, I don't need two game consoles. Let alone two game consoles I have to hook up to my network, even if it's just through a hub. What would happen to my xbox live account? Would I have to add and delete it every time I wanted to switch systems?

 

Three, most of the guys I play with are 'late adopters'. While I'm ahead of the technology curve on them, I can't really see myself playing all the Xbox 2 games as much until they have one as well. With backwards compatibility, that wouldn't be an issue as much. A different game in the same system doesn't seem like nearly as large of a disconnect as a different game in a different system.

[Robot Monkey]

Originally posted by hollismb@Jun 14 2004, 12:25 PM

What would happen to my xbox live account? Would I have to add and delete it every time I wanted to switch systems?

Keep in mind that currently, Live accounts live happily in multiple locations. I've got a copy on my Xbox, on a memory card and (I think it's still there) on a buddy's Xbox. I don't see why it would have to be a problem on Xbox 2.

 

-j

[rustyjaw]

As far as the graphics chipset, I'm curious how many Xbox games, if any, code to the specific hardware rather than to DirectX. Maybe I'm just confused, but from what I understand the Xbox dev environment is quite high-level, which could mean that it's more device independent than, say the PS2 for which developers commonly write a lot of low level code. Again, I really don't understand the technicalities, this may be totally incorrect.

[foogledricks]

I simply don't care whether it does or doesn't. But if having it makes it cost more, or if having it means Microsoft will throw out some other feature that I want like wireless controllers, proper HD support, or whatever, then I obviously would plead that they throw out backward-compatibility in a heart-beat.

[Ricky G]

Interesting, but to me this means nothing. I'm such an "in with the new, out with the old" kinda guy anyway. I never really go back to old games, heck, i can't even keep up with all the cool NEW games.

[Beer Monkey]

Maybe I'm just confused, but from what I understand the Xbox dev environment is quite high-level

 

My understanding was that the games ran in Ring 0 and were much closer to the hardware than PC games...and that this was done for performance purposes.

 

There is also the issue of GPU-specific microcode, which I believe exists on the PC as well...devs who want to exploit the performance that microcode gives will need to have seperate routines for each chipset they support.

 

Is this done at compile time, or runtime? I have heard that, at least on the XBox, there is NVidia-specific code generated at compile time. This would be a problem.

 

The question there would be: does NVidia's license with XBox permit Microsoft to have other vendors clone their microcode instruction set and functionality? I doubt it.

[merlot]

If I had to choose between HD or backwards compatibility, I'd choose the HD. However, looks like MS is dropping the ball with both. Why give us a feature that we all love than rip it away? :roll:

 

Of course neither of these options are a deal breaker for me, I just hate when compaines take "short cuts".

[Beer Monkey]

Hard drive:

 

1) Makes unit bigger

2) Makes unit louder

3) Increases manufacturing cost

4) Attracts the mod crowd who wants to use the system for everything from media playback to emulators to all-out piracy. Systems are a loss-leader, and if you don't buy games, Microsoft loses money on the system they sold you.

 

I'm not saying I agree....but I understand.

 

I would like to see XBox 2 capable of reading custom soundtracks from SMB shares on PC hard drives on your network. Then include enough flash or NVRam for downloaded levels and some game save data.

[Cyberwoo]

If there is not going to be a hard drive in the next Xbox than how will is handle DLC?

[General Zot]

I'm with Hollismb.

 

Including BC I would buy it launch day no questions asked. Without it, there needs to be a must-play title for me to switch over. Maybe they'll have that title at launch and the question is irrelevant (like Xbox and Halo), but I'm saying BC does affect the equation quite a bit.

[foogledricks]

One, I won't be buying an XBOX 2 until there's a game I must have. With backwards compatability, I wouldn't even think about it, and I'd just buy one.

Including BC would buy it launch day no questions asked. Without it, there needs to be a must-play title for me to switch over.

So you'd buy an Xbox 2 at launch, just to play old Xbox 1 games on it? I don't understand. Wouldn't it be better to not buy an Xbox 2 until there is a game for it you want to play? Would you be buying it in the spirit of being an early adopter (I do that sometimes)? Or would you be doing it because maybe Xbox 2 might have some cool feature like wireless controllers, pretty green LED, or something like that? Just fishing for what one gains by owning a machine that has no immediate benefits, other than the previously mentioned early-adopter fix.

[JoeyN]

Im buying the new system for new games. Im not getting rid of my current xbox anyway so the BC dosnt mean much to me. The no HD is another story

 

capt

[scobeto]

Backwards compatibility is a nice feature, but not a neccessity in my book. I can't remember the last time I popped a PS game in the PS2. It's a strong selling point for parents, I think. But, just as others have said, I will be getting the Xbox2 for the next gen games.

 

 

I'm with the Capt on the HDD issue, though.

[bgarcia]

So what do you guys do when your Xbox breaks and Xbox Next doesn't play your old Xbox games? Replace the Xbox (which should be dirt cheap), or wouldn't it be nicer to just be able to pop the old games in the new box? I like scenario #2 personally. The whole 'rack space', 'less wires to connect', 'less inputs to take up' argument is important to me.

[Josh]

I agree. Given the backward compatibility of both my PS2 and GBA, I've been able to keep a working collection of favorites without my living room looking like some teenage dormroom nightmare. As it is, I can play Tetris on my GBA and I can play DDR or FFVII on my PS2.

 

Another thing to consider are the great old-school collections, like the Midway Arcade classics. That'll never get old. I have the old Namco Museums for the PS1 and I pop them in my PS2 all the time. Turns my living room into an instant arcade for friends. I would not want to have to go buy the thing at full retail again just to keep that, and I would not want to have a pile of games and consoles all over my living room.

 

As for the HDD, if MS don't come up with a way to continue content DL and inline saves, I'll be extremely disappointed. Going back to memory cards with extremely limited space at this point would be a major step backwards.

[General Zot]

kf-

 

The benefit being that I have a fairly limited place to put consoles and very limited inputs to the TV. So if I got an Xbox 2 it would replace the Xbox 1 whether I wanted it to or not (it would need to 'live' in that shelf space.) So to buy an Xbox 2 that can play all the Xbox 1 games is a huge advantage as I don't lose anything. Even if the launch titles that I buy suck, I can just go back to playing Halo 2 (or whatever) for the Xbox 1 in the meantime.

 

Otherwise if it can't play Xbox 1 games, then after I play the launch Halo 3 (or whatever) 3 times and get tired of it, there is nothing to do with the Xbrick 2 but unhook it or watch the dust gather waiting for another great game to arrive.

 

So that's the advantage of BC for me...

[MastaRedSnappa]

Two of the most successful gaming platforms of recent memory, the PS2 and the GBA, both feature backward compatibility. I wouldn't say that all of their success is attributable to being backwards compatible, but I think it certainly played a part.

 

For hardcore gamers (a group of which I consider myself a part of), backward compatibility is a low priority. They usually have alot of discretionary cash for gaming and are willing to keep all of their old systems to play their favorite classic games. However, no system can survive supported only by hardcore gamers.

 

Most casual gamers or parents buying game systems for their kids aren't concerned with how powerful the processor is, how much RAM it has, etc. They are concerned about getting the most for their money. When they hear that the system is backwards compatible with the old system they already have alot of games for or that it can play DVD movies, those are major selling points.

 

The more systems that are sold, the more games are made for it, which sells more systems, ad infinitum. If Microsoft wants the Xbox 2 to be successful, they should look at the success of the PS2 and the GBA for guidance.