Next-Gen Xbox To Lack Backwards Compatibility?

An anonymous reader writes "Biz news site Gamesindustry.biz is reporting that Microsoft's Xbox 2 won't be backward compatible with games for the current Xbox, and quoting 'sources close to Microsoft's senior Xbox executives' explaining some of the thinking behind the decision. All very cloak and dagger, although I guess whoever told them would probably be in line for a firing if they found out... So, is Microsoft right or wrong on this one? Have any Slashdot readers ever actually used the backwards compatibility on their PlayStation 2?"

Comments

Bad Move for MS

[(54)T-Dub]

In the article Microsoft claims that only 10% of the PS2 owners care about backwards compatibility. They are probably right, but what percentage of people who bought the ps2 in the first year cared about backwards compatibility. I think backwards compatibility makes it easy to justify the high cost of buying a console early if you know that you can still play the golden oldies and you won't have to fork over $50 a pop for each game, especially if your old console is starting to show some wear and tear. If MS wants to take an early lead they had better reconsider.
I thought this quote from the article summed it up nicely.

"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."

How many people, do you think, held out for the ps2 over the dreamcast because of backwards compatibility?

I wonder if this was the real reason that they dropped the backward compatibility:

Speculation about the backwards compatibility functionality has been rife since it emerged that Xbox 2 ... 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 ...
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.

GameBoy!

[Kjuib]

That is what made the 2nd edition Gameboy such a hit... and the 3rd.. and 4th... and #th version of Gameboy because you could still play your old classic games on them.

That sucks

[ayf6]

I am a avid xbox gamer and would consider an upgrade if I could play my old games on the xbox2. I also would have loved to see a way to transfer the saved settings from my xbox->xbox2 perhaps over the ethernet cable but I guess that will never happen either. This is a very sad article to read given how superior the xbox is to the PS2 for graphic and sound quality. The xbox was truely an inovative game console.

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[Rick the Red]

emulation... would be far more worth it just for a base of titles.

Let's put it this way: If the Xbox2 won't play my Xbox1 games, requiring me to keep both an Xbox1 and Xbox2 connected to my TV, then why should I buy an Xbox2? I'm free to buy any other console that won't play my Xbox1 games: PS3, GameSphere, whatever -- even a PS2, which will be like free by then and have about 100 times more titles.

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[pegr]

This is THE lesson they learned from the PC. While backward compatability severely limited the potential of the PC, it was absolutely required to maintain continuity (check OS/2 sales for reference). The game market is different. If you really need a box for your old XBox games, get an XBox (for prolly >$100 by then).

This will cause some consumer backlash, however. Maybe it will affect sales, maybe it won't.... Since when has the game (or PC, for that matter) market been directed by technical truth rather than marketing FUD?

Hey! Now there is poetic justice! Good luck, BillyBoy! ;)

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[Jtheletter]

apparently one of the small minority of people that believed the XBox controller to be clunky and uncomfortable (in fact caused serious cramping after short use)

Are you talking about the original controller? If so then I think it's safe to say the majority of gamers (read as: humans with human-sized hands) agree it was a POS, but the scaled down s-controller is perfectly comfortable.

In my experience, having lived with 5 roomates with varying console preferences and having both a PS2 and an Xbox on the same communal tv, the PS2 users cause their hands to cramp up using the xbox because they insist on keeping their fingers in the L1L2 R1R2 positions when those buttons don't exist on the xbox controller. If you relax your hands and approach it as a different controller - not as a poorly designed PS2 contoller - then there shouldn't be any trouble at all.

Re:Foot, meet bullet

[stratjakt]

And yet, you have a GameCube, even though it wasn't backwards compatible with N64, which wasn't compatible with SNES, which wasn't compatible with NES..

Backwards compatibility is nice, but not if it compromises the new features of the machine.

I'd rather have a cutting edge console than something that'd been watered down so it can still run old stuff.

There were a lot of disgruntled PS2 early adopters who found its low-res graphics (an artifact from PSX days) to be less-than-impressive. In fact, the first run of games didn't exactly blow away the PSX versions. There was also much ado about the handful of PSX games that were incompatible. It gave them an early black eye.

I'll buy an Xbox 2 for the same reason I've bought any other console: It has some kick-ass games that i want to play. If all it had going for it was compatibility (ie; PS2 for the first year), it'll sit on the shelves.

Compatibility is nice, but not a selling point by itself.

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[foidulus]

If you make your console backwards compatible, it helps your consumers out by a) reducing the amount of space they have to dedicate in their entertainment center for consoles and b) reduces the rats nest of cables that is bound to be connected to said TV. Plus, the original X-Box isn't very "stackable"
Blech! I'll just keep my little gamecube.

Re:Used it?

[swerk]

I bought my PS2 basically as a DVD player that also would play bargain-bin RPGs, e.g. all those PS1 titles I missed out on before. Since then I've bought a few PS2 titles, but most of my playstation library is made up of cheap old PS1 games.

Never having had a PS1, backwards compatibility on the PS2 was a big deal for me, it was like getting two systems in one. I don't have an x-box, and I'm not likely to get the next one of that line either but the ability to play a bargain-bin Panzer Dragoon Orta or Halo certainly would be appealing.

Game Boy has been the best example of backwards compatibility; the fanciest GBA SP of today and even the dual-screened Gameboy of the future will still play the original circa-1988 games. Granted, the Game Boy evolved in small increments, but apart from HDTV resolution and more megahertz, what's the next x-box going to do that the current one doesn't?

Even for folks that don't actually take advantage of a system's backwards compatibility, it's a strong selling point. The device seems more universal. AMD's x86-64 is cool for some of the same reasons. It's the new hotness, but the old and busted stuff still works on it.

Xbox vs. Playstation 1

[daveo0331]

When I bought my Playstation 2, I didn't particularly care about backwards compatibility. Why not? Because I already had a PS 1. This is relevant because the current installed base of Xboxes is a lot less than what the installed base of Playstations was when PS2 came out -- which means there's more people that could benefit from Xbox 2 backwards compatibility than were able to benefit from Playstation 2 backwards compatibility. I would be more inclined to by an Xbox 2 if I knew that by buying one, I could also play all the Xbox games that I can't play now because I don't have an Xbox.

Yeah me too, funny that...

[Simon Carr]

In fact anyone I've spoken to with a PS2 has brought up the backwards compatability thing. It was even one of my considerations when I got mine, and I didn't have any PS1 titles.. I just knew they'd be out there. Granted, since I bought it I've only taken in 3 or 4 PS1 titles, but I still consider it an advantage. When (I guess it's when now) I buy a PS3, backwards compatability with my PS2 games will be one of the selling points since I've invested $TooMuch on my game library.

If I had an XBox, I wouldn't want to have two devices milling about in my entertainment center, especially two devices the size of XBoxes. And then, on down the line, will Live be an Xbox2 only service? If so what happens to everyone who likes playing the original Halo online?

Funnily enough MS seems to think it can afford to do research that supports what it wants to believe is true. I guess technically they -can- afford to, but not if they want to make money on any future ventures. It's a company wide problem from what I can see that needs to be solved.

And yeah the XBox default controllers are huge.

Well I dunno

[Sycraft-fu]

History seems to be on their side. As far as I know, the PS2 is the ONLY popular console ever to be backward compatible. I mean let's run down the big successes console wise:

Atari 2600: First gen.

NES: First gen.
SNES: Planned to be backward compatible, not implemented in release.
N64: Not backward compatible.
Gamecube: Not backward compatible.

SMS: First gen.
Genesis: Not backward compatible.

PS1: First gen.
PS2: Backward compatible.

That's all of the most successful consoles I can think of. Of those, only ONE was backward compatible. Even most of the lesser consoles were not compatible with anything else.

Saturn: Not backward compatible.
Dreamcast: Not backward compatible.
Neo Geo: First (and only) gen.
Jaguar: Not backward compatible.

Now maybe backward compatibility is now huge, amybe now that Sony has started it, it is the one thing that no one will live without. That, however, remains unproven. History indicates that non-backward compatible consoles can be successful. Current evidence seems to support this too. Despite competition from the PS2 and X-box, and lots of raging on graphics quality, the GameCube has done quite well for itself.

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[Teppy]

If leveraging a previous library works, then maybe they should make the XBox 2 backwards compatible with the Playstation 2

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[boarder8925]

How many of you Slashdotters have used the backwards compatibility on PlayStation 2s?

I'm one of them. After my PlayStation broke, I was very grateful for the backwards compatibility.

Using Backwards Compatiblity

[pyrrhonist]

Have any Slashdot readers ever actually used the backwards compatibility on their PlayStation 2?

YES! In fact, I have used it for several games, for the following reasons:

• It just flat out took me a long time to finish the game (Final Fantasy series, MGS VR Missions), because I got distracted with other games/work/bright lights
• The game has a fun head-to-head mode (Soul Blade, Syphon Filter II)
• The game is fun to play more than once (MGS, Syphon Filter)
• I keep the game around for nostalgic purposes (Doom, Warhawk, Original demo disks)
• The game is only available for the PSOne (Final Fantasy IV-VIII)

It's good to be able to sell the old hardware, but keep the games you like to play for use with the new hardware.

BTW, the PS2 can speed up disk access and perform smoothing on some PS1 games, which is kind of neat.

Re:It's just a bloody name

[The-Bus]

To wit:

• Nintendo Entertainment System
  
• Super Nintendo Entertainment System
  
• Nintendo 64
  
• Nintendo GameCube (different media, natch)
  

• Sega CD
  
• Sega Saturn
  
• Sega Dreamcast
  

I don't think ANYONE expected backwards compatibility, and it hasn't really been an industry standard. Playstation/Playstation 2 was THE major exception in U.S. console gaming.
Nintendo has actually made it a business model to resell and repackage old games. Super Mario Bros. for the NES has been re-released a number of times for many systems, including the SNES and the Game Boy Advance/SP. Names are used for branding. People will associate it with something... whether it be cool graphics, Halo, XBox Live, etc. Name association may mean backwards compatibility to some, but only if you started playing during the Playstation era.

Re:one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[-noefordeg-]

Don't underestimate the power of backward compatibility....

Tekken, Rayman, Final Fantasy, and a some other titles are still frequently used in my PS-2.

"Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new."
-No. Not 'only'. It also helps when the developer creates the SAME game for the new console. With maybe a few more lens flares. Well. Lens flares have never made a game good and seldom better.

If what you say should be true we would have to relay on the developers to release the same games over and over or almost the same games, just a bit better, AND we would have to be stupid enough to buy them over and over.

I see it as more or less having to replace me CD collection every 4-5 years. Which is just no-no.

It's been this way with Windows and Office too, but lately it seems like it is going to stop. Or.. Maybe MS will add some lens flares to the Office Helper :p

Best $20 ever

[Psymunn]

Having never owned a PS1, i was over joyed to find FF7 for $20 down at the local EB
Backward compatability is awesome beacuse, quite frankly, with my NES, SNES, n64, and PS2, i am running out of space and outlets around my tv
And some people might say 'ditch the old systems' but I can tell you that, on more then one occasion, my buddies and i have consumed a case of beer and a friday evening reveling in the glory of blades of steel and no newfangledshinyassxbox2 is going to convince me that it isn't an awesome game