No backward compatibility in Xbox 2

[R420]

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."

 

[ccs]

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."

Who cares. Who wants to play Xbox games on an Xbox 2?

 

[Leo]

Who cares. Who wants to play Xbox games on an Xbox 2?

Exactly. There are only two units that I can think of that had backward
compatibility. The PS2 and the Game Boy (insert your version here).
With the Game boy it was basically because the only changes were the
addition of a color screen, a light and a smaller unit. They didn't
change the guts of the game boy other than due to miniturization of
components, so it's basically the same game boy as the original made
however many moons ago now. The PS2 is the only console I can recall
with backwards compatibility, and due to the sales they have had, people
just assume it is/should always be this way. Keep in mind that given
the average age of most gamers, Many never even played a NES or even a
SNES. When the next gen came out, you bought the new one, plain and
simple. While it is a nice feature in only having to have one system
hooked up to your tv, many now have both PS2 and Xbox at home, why not
add an Xbox 2 to the mix. With the exception of a few outstanding
titles, most people don't play PS one games on their PS2 consoles. The
same would be true of Xbox 2, and since many of the outstanding games on
the Xbox are series games, I am sure a newer, better version of them
will be out at launch or within a month of launch.

 

[Cryofax]

Who cares. Who wants to play Xbox games on an Xbox 2?

I do. I have a big X-Box library and don't want more than one console
sitting under my TV. I'll stick with the X-Box until the game library for
the X-Box2 is big enough and good enouogh to make me forget my vast X-Box
library. And also when I can mod my X-Box2 so it can do everything my X-Box
does. In other words I'll probably get an X-Box 2 at least half-way through
its life cycle

- Cryo

 

[magnulus]

Everybody says backwards compatibility doesn't matter, and this might be
true for a console that lasts 5-6 years like the Playstation. But Microsoft
is planning an early release in 2005, so they risk alienating their fanbase.

Yeah, only 10 percent of PS2 owners were interested in backwards
compatibility. It's a largely symbolic move on Sony's part, although I did
make use of the feature (having never owned a Playstation before). It's
just a "nice touch", also helps encourage people who own the last console to
buy the next one. Sometimes the old console is worn out (especially disk
type media- including hard disks, BTW), and a new, backwards compatible
console wil keep playing old games.

I think Microsoft faces long term strategy problems with their console.
They have successfully gutted the finer points of PC gaming (Bungie, ahem)
to try and prop up their platform, and even then they don't do too well.
Links 2004, for instance, on the PC got rather mediocre reviews for a game
that Microsoft basicly took out of its element and desperately put onto a
console to try and round out its meager library with few "killer apps". I
think the only thing that has made X-Box number 2 globally, instead of a
total washout ,has been Nintendo's snatching defeat from the jaws of
victory. Between the ridiculous design of their hardware (their controllers
are far too small and flimsy feeling, and the button design is ridiculous
and fischer-price-esque... not to mention the general unfriendlyness of the
square box shape on an entertainment rack), to the odd choices in media,
and, begrudgingly I'll admit, a nonexistant online component, I think it's
safe to say Microsoft owes its console success to Nintendo's poor showing.

 

[Outback Jon]

The PS2 is the only
console I can recall with backwards compatibility,

Well, the Atari 7800 could play Atari 5200 games....

Guess I'm a little old....

--
"Outback" Jon Gould | Let those who RIDE,
2003 Kawasaki Concours (wreck)|
1976 Honda CB750F (needs work)| DECIDE.
1972 Yamaha DS7 (project) |
(e-mail address removed) | HELMET LAWS SUCK
CQ CQ CQ de KC2BNE |
______________________________|____________________________
AMD XP 2400+ @ 2180 MHz 768M PC2100 DDR @ 290 MHz
Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe 120GB and 40GB Maxtor HD
Asus GeForceFX 5600 (330/650) Cornerstone 21" Monitor
Sony 52x40x52 CDRW NEC MultiSync 17" Monitor
Sony 8X DVD+-RW Nostromo n50 Speedpad
http://folding.stanford.edu - got folding? Team 33432

 

[Miles Noe]

Alot of people care, ask anyone who has worked in the gaming industry.
WHether its sales or programming, people want to be able to play
their old game son their new system. If the ps3 lets you play ps2
games on it, the Xbox has already shot itself in the foot.

 

[Mickey Johnson]

You must be old... a 7800 could play 2600 games.. 5200 were a different
style of cartridge.



--
Mickster

Visit my website and see my arcade!!

http://mickster.freeservers.com

 

[Jordan Lund]

(e-mail address removed) (R420) wrote in message
A key point which will be ignored even though I've been saying it all along:

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

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.

- Jordan

 

[Gus Lane]

I don't know if this is a good idea. What about all the people that spent
hundreds of dollars on X-box games?

Gus

 

[Jose314]

Who cares. Who wants to play Xbox games on an Xbox 2?

Well, I do.

 

[Clixx]

(e-mail address removed) (Jordan Lund) wrote in

(e-mail address removed) (R420) wrote in message

A key point which will be ignored even though I've been
saying it all along:



- Jordan

I think you'd agree that there is a big difference between PS1
games and PS2/XBox games. PS1 games are not that great to want
to play them on PS2. However, there are many XBox/PS2 games that
will still be worth playing 2-3 years from now, especially for
a first-timer. By the time PS3 and XBox2 hit the market
the must-have's for last gen. consoles will be like 10-15$.
I also makes more sense to have only one console under your TV
especially if both of them would be hooked up with component
cables ( rare case, but nontheless ). I do believe that backward
compatibility will be more valuable this time around. Only time
will tell.

 

[Union Kane]

Exactly. There are only two units that I can think of that had backward
compatibility. The PS2 and the Game Boy (insert your version here).
With the Game boy it was basically because the only changes were the
addition of a color screen, a light and a smaller unit. They didn't
change the guts of the game boy other than due to miniturization of
components, so it's basically the same game boy as the original made
however many moons ago now. The PS2 is the only console I can recall
with backwards compatibility, and due to the sales they have had, people
just assume it is/should always be this way. Keep in mind that given
the average age of most gamers, Many never even played a NES or even a
SNES. When the next gen came out, you bought the new one, plain and
simple. While it is a nice feature in only having to have one system
hooked up to your tv, many now have both PS2 and Xbox at home, why not
add an Xbox 2 to the mix. With the exception of a few outstanding
titles, most people don't play PS one games on their PS2 consoles. The
same would be true of Xbox 2, and since many of the outstanding games on
the Xbox are series games, I am sure a newer, better version of them
will be out at launch or within a month of launch.

Backwards compatibility was good for PS2 because the launch library stunk.
So the appeal of playing your favorite, and maybe unfinished games from PS1,
on the new sysytem is understandable. I don't care what Microsoft says,
they know their launch library was shit, save for a few games. With
companies getting dev. kits 1.5 years before launch for Xbox 2, I don't see
a repeat of this. I won't buy an Xbox 2 until a couple games that I want to
play are out, having said that, I will be making space in my home theatre by
trading in my Xbox, even if it means no more Halo 2 (sniff )

 

[Keith C. G.]

Well, I've spent about $1200 on games for Xbox. If, there is no backwards
compatibility, I will mod my xbox, rip everything I rent to the upgraded
hard drive, and revert back to PC gaming....never to buy another xbox game
again...much less the xbox2. Especially if they release a Hard Drive as a
separate peripheral.

Thanks a lot for the support you grant for all the people that supported you
Microsoft.

 

[MS]

I think this is both a good and a bad thing. A good thing if it makes XBox2
cheaper and more powerful and a bad thing for those with a huge game
library.

But then again...Amiga wasn't compatible with C64, and I had a huge amount
of games for C64. But Amiga was much more powerful and the games much
better. I had both C64 and Amiga for six months or so, and I noticed that
not once did I play C64 games after getting Amiga. If the developers had
made Amiga compatible with C64 it probably wouldn't had been as powerful.

The thing with backwards compability always means that the console also
drags along all the problems and old technology of the old one. My cd wasn't
compatible with my old LP records, and I had no problem buying the music
again once I had tried a cd player and noticed how much better the sound is,
and how much nicer a cd is to use.

So I don't mind, as long as it means that Xbox2 games will really blow my
socks of with amazing graphics, sound and gameplay, just like Xbox did when
I first got it.

And that means that I hope to see PGR3, RSC3 and Halo3 at launch...

 

[Mattinglyfan]

(e-mail address removed) (Jordan Lund) wrote in


I think you'd agree that there is a big difference between PS1
games and PS2/XBox games. PS1 games are not that great to want
to play them on PS2. However, there are many XBox/PS2 games that
will still be worth playing 2-3 years from now, especially for
a first-timer. By the time PS3 and XBox2 hit the market
the must-have's for last gen. consoles will be like 10-15$.
I also makes more sense to have only one console under your TV
especially if both of them would be hooked up with component
cables ( rare case, but nontheless ). I do believe that backward
compatibility will be more valuable this time around. Only time
will tell.

Do you not think that people felt the same way about PS1 games back then?

 

[Skeksis]

Who cares. Who wants to play Xbox games on an Xbox 2?

I do. One box will do for me, thanks.

Skeksis

 

[Ken]

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

What about backward compatibility of peripherals, like controllers,
connectors, memory cards, etc.?

Surely, they won't make us go out and repurchase all that stuff too.

 

[chrisv]

Thanks a lot for the support you grant for all the people that supported you
Microsoft.

Don't you know that Micro$oft would gladly come to your house and take
a shite on your front porch, if it meant one more dollar for them?

 

[Mike D]

who cares? I care.

gameing platforms change because the graphics and interactivity have
come a longer way. from 1d -> 2d -> 3d (simulated). Untill they come
out with 3d as in holigraphic i dont want to have to buy new games
over and over again. Thats crap.

thats a main reason i went from a nintendo -> n64 -> ps2,psONE -> Xbox
(i skiped the snes) because thats to much to invest in a system and
games to have them yank out the cord. at a 50$ price tag and the way
the used gameing companies rip you off its seriously not worth it.

I dont have a HUGE library but i do have games such as steel battalion
which carries a price tag that is larger then the console. Personaly I
ended up selling my ps2 because i dont use it anymore, because i like
the xbox graphix.

But sony as a company is lightyears ahead of MS as far as knowing what
the customers want out of their consols. Keep the platform the same,
keep the remote the same, upgrade the hardware.

I knew it from the begining MS was going to enter the console market
and try and bully itself into the home. and i ended up getting one,
and i enjoy it at least 4 days out of a week. but i will not buy a
xbox2 unless i get something MAJOR (cash or same game for the new
platform for FREE) for my current library and hardware.

MS really needs to get its head out of its arse and start listening to
the little people. WHEN PEOPLE FIND SOMETHING THEY LIKE DONT CHANGE IT
TO THE POINT THEY CANT USE IT.