Slashdot Mirror
Xbox 2 - The Price of Compatibility?
Randy Lastimosa writes "1UP.com has an interesting article about the next Xbox, and whether it will support current Xbox games. They talked to a number of sources and got conflicting reports. For example, the CEO of Nvidia, who provided graphics chips for the current Xbox, said: 'It's virtually impossible on many levels,' he adds. 'On an intellectual-property level. On practical levels, too.'"
not being backwards compatible will just push everyone to playstation. Hopefully, the playstation 3 will still play playstation 1 games. sure, those games won't look as cool as the newest games, but being able to play them is the point in having a game system.
Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
Why would you want to have backwards compatability anyways? I've never played a PS1 game on my PS2, and never been chagrined I couldn't fire up my N64 games on the gamecube. By definition, old games are...old. And crappy. In any case, if I have a stack of old games, why wouldn't I still have the console?
And I would rather not have another console taking up space. If one console can play the games of an older console, then great. That is why I have my Dreamcast with all my NES games on a cd, instead of my NES hooked up (and yes I do own a NES).
i still wont buy one. i think its ridiculous to spend 300+ on a console system. ill stick with counterstrike and doom3, thanks.
hell, i dont even have a regular xbox yet. i might pick one up when they drop to 99. last console i bought was n64, and i think i paid 99 for that as well.
i just find that games on pc are far superior to console games. plus, playing halo on a console controller is hard as balls. give me a keyboard and mouse anyday.
Thats all you had to say, negro. DirectX hides the hardware from the developer and with the XBOX being realtively overpowered for the current console generation its unlikely many low level optimizations were necessary for any of the current games (Doom III will be interesting though). I'd take any comments from nvidia on the future of the next Microsoft console as so many grains of salt on top of alot of sour grapes.
Is backwards compatibility a sure thing? I don't think so at this point, but I wouldn't take anything nvidia has to say as any more than bitter FUD.
They could have an emulator in the ROM, as the PPC Macs do for 68k code. Or the game manufacturers could include something akin to "fat binaries", where there is code for both and the OS chooses which to use depending on the processor it's running on.
☠
You know, the most common argument people have made against X-Box in the past is "Microsoft is new to the video console world, and as such there are no good game developers making games for Microsoft."
:)
It just strikes me as odd that they would have this sort of debate. Is Microsoft now in a significantly better position to entice video game offers from companies, or do they still need time to develop a presence in the console video game market?
One could even joke that since Microsoft doesn't expect any game developers to make games for them, they should make XBox Next backwards compatible
But on a general note, I don't see why video game consoles need to be backwards compatible. With new Operating systems/hardware and computer software the issue is that people like to preserve existing data, and you can never be sure if everyone who wants to use your product is sufficiently upgraded.
In this case, I agree that Microsoft shouldn't bother with an extroadinary effort for backwards compatibility. Emulators are the way to go for nostalgics.
I worked at MSG Studios for three years on two projects one was a X-Box game the other was a port of a X-Box game to PC (you can guess which one) and I can tell you that if MS goes with a ATI GPU with the next Xbox then there is NO way they can have backward compatibility with games from the old Xbox. On the game we ported to PC we had to re-write whole sections of the graphics engine just to support non-NVIDIA chips and since the old Xbox games do not have this support then they won't work on the new one... so stop your bitching and moaning.
Short answer : The XBox ( and it's games ) didn't sell well enough to justify keeping any next-generation XBox compatible with previous games.
For Sony, it made sense to build in PS1 emulation to the PS2 because the original Playstation was so popular and sold so many games. Heck, they're *still* selling orginal Playstations, and people are still buying shrink-wrapped Playstation 1 games, to a lesser extent.
Will Microsoft piss off the majority of the console-game users if they release a new game console which doesn't play Xbox games? No, because most of us don't _have_ Xbox games...
MS may ( correctly ) figure that the current crop of Xbox owners will buy the latest and greatest game machine no matter what, "because it plays Halo5" or whatever...
In short, the libraries for the XBox are intended to be familiar and somewhat source compatible, but any production XBox game is far from that and would be incredibly difficult to duplicate on a binary level.
Backward compatability is the key.
Why?
If I want to play my old games, I can play them on the old X-Box. If X-Box2 (Y-Box?) supports the old games, I probably would not be able to sell the old one for much money anyway.
The key to getting me to buying a new-generation X-Box is not backward compatibility. It's making sure that there are fun games which take advantage of the better technology.
Being backward compatible with existing USB controllers would be nice, though. I would hate to think that people who bought $100 DDR pads or fancy steering wheels would be unable to use them with the new system.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I really don't understand what the problem is, and I don't think cost is a problem to make backward compatibility.
Microsoft can port the APIs to the new chips.
Microsoft can emulate x86 with a PPC through Connectix's VirtualPC technology. I'd think a G5 should be able to emulate a 733 PIII well enough, particularly if the use of API code clears a lot of CPU headroom to cover the non-API code.
What graphics chip shouldn't matter either as that detail should have been covered by APIs.
If they don't care to do it, that's fine, but I think they can probably do it without sacrificing any functionality.
I've bought more PS1 games than PS2 games since I got my PS2. There's a lot of nice older, affordable games out.
THE NERD IS THE COMPUTER.
Let's see ... you obviously own a playstation 1, or you would not have games for that system that you want to play.
I don't own a PS1, just a PS2. The PS1 backward compatability is a huge plus because I can get any of the thousands of PS1 games for like $3 each at gamestop or Electronics Boutique. Beyond that, there are tons of fun games for the PS1 (not available on any other console) that didn't stop being fun when the PS2 came out.
Backwards compatibility will being in more customers than may be expected I think, because of the money advantage. I don't have an X-Box because I keep waiting for it to drop to gamecube levels (which incidently, I waited for with the gamecube too) I'm not really keen on paying $200 for a system that's going to be replaced in a year or so and for which no new games are going to be produced. However, I would be more inclined to buy an X-Box 2 at slightly higher prices if I knew that I could pick up all the old X-Box games for cheap and still be able to get the new hits.
This is true as well. Unfortunately most people find that the DVD player has one major flaw: compatibility. This is unfortunate, because (at least with the later drivers) the interface and remote were very high-quality.
(Oddly, compatibility isn't a PS2-specific problem. The XBOX has problems as well, and so do most dedicated DVD players! I found this out pretty quickly when shopping for one. I ended up with a $70 Samsung, which has no reported issues, and even played most of the way through a cracked DVD, but I like the PS2's UI much better.)
However I don't think any of these things were the "biggest". I think the biggest thing going for the PS2 was Sony hype, riding on the success of the PS1. :-) Fortunately for Sony they were able to back it up with a great library. And hopefully they will continue the trend with the PS3.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
The PS2's backwards compatibility has practically nothing to do with the success of the PS1, and almost everything to do with Sony trying to save money. The PS2 actually includes most of the PS1's hardware. The PS1 processor actually handles I/O for the PS2, and since Sony already has fabrication facilities designed to produce those chips, it was a no-brainer. The backwards compatibility was just added because A) it was convenient and easy, and B) it's one more feature they can hype.
As opposed to what, buying an Xbox2 because it plays the original Halo? Yeah, that'd make sense...
I'm not arguing that backwards compatibility is a non-issue; it'd be nice. But ya know what? It's way overstated. I already have an Xbox, and anyone that doesn't will be able to get one dirt cheap by the time its successor rolls out. If Microsoft can include enhanced functionality in the Xbox2 and cut costs at the cost of losing backwards compatbility, I'm all for it. I'd rather my Xbox2 play Xbox2 games well, rather than cost a fortune with medicore performance because 5 people out there want it to play Xbox games, too.
Man... you're carrying the anti-Microsoft sentiment way too far. They may be greedy, law-breaking bastards, but they didn't get to where they are by being stupid and making a lot of poor business decisions.
And a personal rant: As an owner of all 3 consoles (well, two now... traded the Gamecube in), I'd easily put the Xbox as my favorite. It doesn't have the volume of good games that the PS2 does, but the (mostly exclusive) good titles it does have are just as high-quality, if not better. And honestly, I don't give a rat's ass about Dragon Ball or Final Fantasy or whatever the rage is with all the pre-teens with ADD these days; you take away those games (which are more "commercially successful" than "good" - heh, kinda like Windows), and there really isn't a whole lot left on the PS2. PS2 has SOCOM, Jak, Ratchet & Clank, and Armored Core, and the Xbox has Halo, Rainbow 6, Steel Batallion, and Crimson Skies. They're both great consoles, but when you take Xbox Live and upcoming games like Sudeki, Fable, and TFLO into account, I'd definitely give the edge to the Xbox. And the Gamecube? It was great for a while, but none of the games on that system have even the slightest bit of replayability except for Smash Bros. and Double Dash, both of which require a bunch of friends around to have a good time. Besides... these days, Nintendo's first-party characters are the $2 whores of the video game industry. They may not be as bad as Sega with Sonic, but...
I don't know I already have an Xbox to play Xbox games. If I didn't have one I'm sure you can pick one up when Xbox2 comes out for the about $50-$70. I'd rather my Xbox2 be alot cheaper with new functionality.
No. Second hand XBox1s will not be as cheap as second hand playstations precisely because you need the old consoles to play the old games! They're not obsolete as soon as you've upgraded..
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
My wife is an avid console gamer, and she already has nine game systems connected to the TV in the living room. (Counting the Sega CD and 32x as part of the Genesis, despite their $#%!@$% separate video connections and wall warts.) She doesn't have a X-Box yet due to a lack of titles that interest her, but she'll likely get one eventually. And let me tell you, as the one who modifies the A/V cabinet and fights the wiring rat's nest behind it to accommodate these systems, I was thrilled when the PS2 completely replaced the original Playstation. (Okay, there's the multitap incompatibility, but that's relatively minor.)
Not only is my wife still playing them, she's still buying titles off the long list of Playstation games she wants. Indeed, we pre-ordered and picked up the PS2 the morning it was released specifically to play Playstation games. Sure, we bought some launch titles, but that wasn't the point. (Thank goodness, as they weren't very good!) Her Playstation was dying and needed to be replaced anyway. The timing was perfect.
Now, there probably won't be too many folks who have their X-Boxes die just as the X-Box 2 hits the shelves (cue conspiracy theories about destructive updates), but backwards compatibility can still be beneficial. The PS2 didn't launch with many titles, and the ones it had were generally not much to get excited over. However, it had an enormous back catalogue of Playstation titles, many available at discount or pre-owned. That helped its success substantially.
"Be Happy or Die." -- AoN
Interesting post. You have in a way confirmed what must have been Microsofts original game-plan: Make a super-charged pure gaming-machine and the gamers will follow.
I don't own a PS2 or a GC but I can't imagine being without my Xbox. And my reasons?
1) Xbox Live (truly amazing)
2) Best graphics/sound
3) HDTV/5.1 with 16x9 (Halo2 will support 16x9 1080i)
4) Ripping CD's for jukebox & music during games
5) High quality exculsive games
If your a gamer but your staying away from Xbox because of your anti-MS politics than your not really a gamer.
Right before, we, Microsoft reduce the price on our current model X-Box from $179.99 to $99.99 we leak rumors that, maybe, the new console won't support the old X1 games.
We know that if we said otherwise, some folks may be willing hold off on buying an X1. Waiting for an X2, and forgetting about the current X1 saves the purchase price of one X1 unit, but one must wait until X2 is released.
However, by indicating that the X2 will not support X1 games, we essentially tell the customers to go buy one now, b/c you may never get to play Halo otherwise. Oh, and by the way, we're offering a great deal on Mr. X1 right now. $80 off what your friends just paid a few months ago to buy one for X-mas.
This may just be all about moving more Generation One X-boxes between now and the actual realase of the Gen Two.
I see trademark issues here...
What trademark issues? It's entirely legal for two companies to use similar marks, so long as there does not exist a significant potential for consumer confusion. Bob McDonald's Auto Repair, for instance, isn't in any danger from the restaurant chain. A relevant precedent is the case of Apple Computer and Apple Records, both of which got to keep using their marks.
Now, clearly the Xbox and NeXT exist in a similar market, unlike Apple Computer and Apple Records. But NeXT computers aren't being manufactured or sold anymore. How the hell can you get confused into thinking that an Xbox Next would have anything to do with NeXT computers? We're not talking about a recognizable, clear brand here (such as "Atari"), we're talking about a simple English word -- it's much more difficult to get confused into thinking that the two marks are related.
All of this is assuming, of course, that someone actually owns the trademark on NeXT and it is still valid. Considering that the computers are not being manufactured anymore, it is entirely possible that this is not the case.
ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
Out of curiousity, how does 10,000,000 machines consititute a failure? Is GameCube a failure then? Is Tivo a failure because it doesn't even approach VCR numbers?
Sony is a firmly-entrenched and formidable competitor. If MS is still selling 1/5 the systems in a few year, then yeah, by all means I'd expect MS to back out. Right now, though, they did pretty decent considering the dismal selling in Japan (now THAT was a failure).
Um, as an Xbox developer, how can you be so utterly wrong?
"because Microsoft stipulates, as a condition to get a game certified by them, all Xbox games must access the hardware the DirectX APIs and XTL libs, rather than writing direct to hardware registers/ports"
There are no such stipulations. Plenty of people have written custom code that accesses, for example, the GPU directly (look at Halo). Carmack was talking about using OpenGL for the Doom 3 port. Yes, the SDKs push DirectX, and MS highly recommends using it, but you're free to use whatever libraries you want for your software.
It's a rather strange disadvantage, but a disadvantage none the less. (If it's true of course.) Presumably with more time to work on the issue, and (hopefully) having seen the importance of four controllers for the GameCube and XBox, they'll have figure out a way around this issue for the PS3. (Perhaps having a seperate chip or two for the backwards compatibility, rather than trying to merge functionality with the I/O process?)
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Probably because most of the people who own PS2's and not X-Boxes have sworn many times that they would never buy an X-Box anyway, so missing that segment of the market is not really much of a loss.
" it must be said that the XBOX was not successful enough (especially in Japan, where it counts)"
What? We're not in the 90's anymore. The importance of the markets (in terms of size) goes in this order: North America, Europe, and THEN Japan.
I remember when you'd be hard-pressed to find a good western console game. Now look at any "top ten rated games" chart for this generation, and 9 out of 10 are western. Tony Hawk, Halo, Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, Metroid Prime, Project Gotham 2, etc etc ad nauseum, it's all western-developed games. Japan seems to have shot its load and passed out in fatigue after releasing Final Fantasy X and Metal Gear Solid 2 in 2001. I can't name a single AAA-status game they've released since then.
I think Japan stopped counting long ago.