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

one of the reasons they prospered w/the PC?

[garcia]

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.

This is also coming from the company that did consumer research that found their controller was superior. I am apparently one of the 10% of people that thought that the PS2's backwards compatibility was important, 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), and that small group that seriously believes that part of the reason that MS has dominated the market place on the PC side was for backward compatibility with their products.

MS is changing the architecture, the design, and the graphics chip (ATI, no HD, and non-Intel) which will obviously force emulation (which, according to the article, was being planned) but I would think it would be far more worth it just for a base of titles. I believe the PS2 did *so* well because of the large base of titles that came from the PS1 and I can't imagine that the XB2 will be debuting with any base if they don't have backwards compatibility.

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

[gabebear]

reminds me of Microsoft's Get the Facts crap. I actually ordered their free Windows/Linux evaluation kit. Funniest thing I've ever seen, and it cost them $3.82 just to ship the crap to me, not to mention the cost of materials. I'm now using the folder they gave me for my Comp-Sci classes.

I imagine they backed themselves into a hole by going with an Nvidia chipset. They don't own licences to emulate all of Nvidia's shader stuff on ATI hardware, so they do a "study" showing how it doesn't matter. Sony on the other had has licenced (or cross-licenced) pretty much everything in the PS2.

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

[gabec]

One point to think of, regarding "How many of you Slashdotters have used the backwards compatibility on Playstation 2's" is that, well, actually making use of PS2's backwards compatibility is most likely quite rare, but when it was a *new* console it meant that the console immediately had 100x the games of any competitor.

Backward compatibility only helps you get people when the console is new. I remember the arguments when XBox first came out: "Well, I could get an XBox but it has *no* games! What am I going to do, play Halo for the next two years waiting for real games?"

Of course, it turns out that most of my friends *do* solely play Halo... :P

For XBox Next it's a matter of the lesser of two evils: do we cut out the possibility for hacks (Linux) or do we cut out our feet off *again* by having a virtually non-existant game library? Of course, with the massive changes to the hardware that are coming backwards compatibility would have an extremely high price anyway.

Have there been any consoles other than PS2 that offered backwards compatibility?

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

[aj50]

but for graphics instensive, CPU optimized code like games, it would take a hell of a lot of CPU horse power I don't know how much it would need but I would expext the XB2 to actually *have* a hell of a lot of CPU power. If it does, could it run it (I know nothing, how much do you mean by a hell of a lot) and if it doesn't, why are people going to buy it?

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

[computechnica]

The Gameboy Advance has backward compatibility with all old Gameboy and Gameboy Color cartridges. It helped me transition from the old to the new. I sold my old Playstation and Gameboy color for store credit at Game-Exchange. Then went and bought a new PS2 and GBA and could still use my old games. Nintendo thinks it is important, the Gameboy DS will have two cartridge slots for compatibility all the way back to 1988 version of Tetris(which helped launch the Gameboy)

Maybe Micro$oft is trying to prevent a similar upgrade chain?

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

[Aqua OS X]

"Of course, it turns out that most of my friends *do* solely play Halo... :P" :) hehe, ya I own an Xbox and a ton of games.... but I only play Halo. Although the other games I own are quite fun, console Halo is video crack.

I know at least 4 other people in a similar situation ;).

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

[TechniMyoko]

I actually find the cubes the worst of the controllers. The dpad is too small the lip at the top of the shoulder buttons prevent holding both the shoulder and Z at the same time. there shouldve been a Z equivalent on the left side the bean arrangement is stupid, if you havent gotten used to the 4 circular buttons by now go back to the nes. you cant push B and X at the same time the c stick is just bad. it shouldve been the same kind of stick as the other one. my small fingers get pinched in the middle a lot the start button is too far from either side for small hands the only things they got right were the one analog stick (not the c stick), and the b button

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

[Creepy]

I had thought this might be one of the reasons MS bought VirtualPC - at least, I did when I heard that the CPU they were going to use was PowerPC. Now I'm not so sure - emulating/overriding the nVidia graphics subsystem may not be possible. I was thinking they'd port the API layer and only emulate instructions as necessary (like the WINE on PPC proposed - probably much easier to do with the original source code).

The main reason to switch to the PowerPC was the "computer on a chip" tech that makes building them MUCH cheaper. Rumor has it that Sony and Microsoft may even use the same multi-core chip (and Nintendo a similar one). Not that it matters much - the GPU(s) is going to matter more for polygon count.

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

[kmo]

That's fine for normal proggies but for graphics instensive, CPU optimized code like games, it would take a hell of a lot of CPU horse power to make the games enjoyable under an emulator. Which is why they wouldn't do it that way. The way to emulate a graphic game on a new architecture is to capture the API calls into your library (in this case directX). The captured calls are then run at fully optimized speed on the new CPU and GPU. Do this for the OS/system calls as well and big chunks of the game would be running at full speed on the new platform. Emulating x86 instructions on a ppc g5 is not trivial, but it is feasible. Their bigger problem is lack of hard disk. I don't know how many xbox games need significant amounts of disk (levels, save games etc), but if xbox2 doesn't have one, it's pretty hard to emulate it. (Of course, if the whole idea is to force you to have broadband, and to use MSN/XboxLive to serve as your "local" storage, that's feasible too. Maybe I should stop giving them ideas.)

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

[xanderwilson]

I agree that Nintendo thinks backwards compatibility is important (and I agree with Nintendo that it should be), but why do you think they haven't pursued it with their consoles, and only with their Gameboy series? I haven't seen anything about Nintendo's next-gen console. Will they be finally offering any backawards compatibility in their next system?

With the GameCube, I can imagine that moving from cartridge to optical disk meant two separate reading mechanisms, which would've made it too expensive. But that doesn't explain why three generations (NES-SuperNES-N64) of cartridge-based systems didn't offer it. On the other hand, until the GameCube, they didn't have the example of the PS-PS2 succcess that showed them how compelling backwards-compatibility could be.

It's also possible that Nintendo wants people to buy the same games in new formats, which could mean the current NES-classic re-releases on the GameBoy were planned well in advance.

Alex.

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

[BreadMan]

Dumb question from a software guy:

Would it be that difficult/expensive to put two processors in the box and have the boot loader figure out what processor to hand control over to when reading the CD? By the time this XBox ships, the CPU in the original XBox could hardly be that expensive, compared to the cost of the other components, or is there enough difference between the chips that this would be too hard/expensive?

Seems like lack of backward compatibility is one of those things that causes people to think twice before buying. My kids still play PS1 games on the PS2, like FF and Spyro.

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

[Neva]

One point to think of, regarding "How many of you Slashdotters have used the backwards compatibility on Playstation 2's" is that, well, actually making use of PS2's backwards compatibility is most likely quite rare, but when it was a *new* console it meant that the console immediately had 100x the games of any competitor.

I've had good experience with a friend who owns only a PS2, and she likes to play a lot of PS1 games as well (namely Final Fantasy series 7, 5 and 1-2-3)

Breaking backwards compatibility seems to be in line with the previous slashdot article on M$ losing the API war

Power PC?

[LEgregius]

Rumors I've heard say that IBM PPC 97x cpu's will be used.

Re:Power PC?

[0x0d0a]

Yes, but Microsoft purchased Connectix and acquired Virtual PC, which has an emulation engine that should be fast enough to emulate the x86 processor in the XB1 at the XB2's processor speed.

Presumably the appeal of PowerPC is that, while emulating x86 on PowerPC is somewhat feasible (if a bit slow) because of the much greater number of PPC general-purpose registers, it is impossible to emulate the PowerPC on the x86 without severe performance impacts.

This is a very nice copy protection method for Microsoft -- all those Windows users out there can't just download an XB2 emulator and start playing.

Will it be cheaper?

[emo boy]

I want to know if it will be cheaper because of this. If there is a discount due to not having two chips in it then I'm all for it. Otherwise, I can't wait for PS3.

Hmm.

[Bluesman]

I don't think this will affect future sales of XBox 2's as much as it will hurt current sales. People will be much more likely to get a PS2 console or game if they have the option to keep playing it on the PS3.

If Sony keeps the compatibility going, I don't see MS displacing them any time soon.

You gotta be fucking shittin me....

[greymond]

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

Um yeah who the hell doesn't?! I play all my PS1 games on my PS2 and look forward to playing my PS2-PS1 games on my PS3 when it comes out. As much as i'd hate to see the Xbox go the Nintendo route and fuck over their consumer base I think MS should....

The reason is the Xbox is great, but it's so freeking easy to pirate the games on it, and I understand if they want to make it more secure/proprietary. As it is now, you put your mod chip in and a larger drive, flash the bios and install the new dashboard and from then on any game you rent you simply hit "copy to hard drive" and its yours. You NEVER buy games...EVER...

With the PS2 yeah you can mod it to play burned copies, but then you got to fuck with your burner software and be picky about your cd media. Also the mod chip for the PS2 is a solder only and not a "stick and screw" chip like some of the the xbox ones.

Major architectural differences?

[MisterP]

I'm sure I'm oversimplifying things, but I don't see how it would be possible to emulate a P3 700 class CPU on a 1.xGHz processor of a completely different archecture. They don't even share endianess (is that a word?)

When IBM and ATI announced they be supplying the parts I thought right away there would be no backwards compatibility.

Maybe they'll sneak an XBox1-on-a-chip in there?

Two things...

[jvmatthe]

1) Yes, I use the backward compatibility of my PS2 all the time. Since I got my PS2, my PSOne library has more than doubled (maybe even tripled) in size; the games are just so cheap that I'd be crazy to pass up that inexpensive gaming option. Then there's the fact that I had a sizeable number of PSOne titles I was terribly fond of before I got my PS2, so I didn't have to give them up or keep a second console around to play them. The indications that the PS3 will have PS2/PSOne compatibility are just the kinds of things that will tip me toward a PS3 purchase when that day comes.

2) Some more stuff about backward compatibility from a while back here. I don't find it that surprising that Microsoft is willing to break with the Xbox when they release the successor: it will only be energy and money that they lose on their way to trying to be profitable in the video game industry.

Quicker launch

[freeduke]

Changes in hardware are not user's concern: he wants to play games, if that means throwing all the title available for X-Box 1, he'll wait until good titles are there for X-Box2... While, with backward comptibility, he would go straight to the shop, and buy it.

That would allow Microsoft to take a good advantage over PS3, setting its market before the PS3 arrival. But here users will wait until good titles, and also PS3 are there. As PS3 should be backward compatible, it will allow Sony to sell its gaming system quicker and at a higher price than Microsoft.

VPC

[devinoni]

Microsoft can use their virtual pc technology to run the x86 instructions on the PowerPC architecture. However, if the PowerPC processor they are using from IBM is based on the POWER architecture, they'll lack the ability to run in big-endian. VPC is supposed to support the G5s later this year. So it's not out the realm of possibility. Remember, Nintendo generally doesn't have backwards compatibility. Breaking compatibility would allow them the flexibility of changing their controller as well.

I never had a PS 1... value gamers

[mekkab]

BUT I have PS1 games for my PS2. So suck on that.

For gamers who need to be up to the minute; backwards compatibility is not important.

But for the value gamer; the ones who wait until PS2 games are re-released as "Classics" with the red boarder and sell for $20 (instead of $50)- these are the people who will pick up older games and play them on their modern system.

Cheap skates of the world, Unite!

Re:Why not?

[stratjakt]

The costs outweigh the benefits.

Costs can be other than financial. For instance, some technical hurdle that would cripple your machine if you wanted backwards compatibility.

This is a move from x86 to PPC architecture. Perhaps backwards compatibility would have meant including the old GPUs, etc.

SNES wasn't backwards compatible with NES for similar reasons. They would have wasted too much silicon doing old stuff. Same with N64, Gamecube, and no doubt Gamecube 2.

Emulators

[falser]

Calm down, once the first modchips are released I'm sure it'll be a matter of weeks until Xbox1 games work on Xbox2 through an emulator.

Backward compatability

[JWSmythe]

My PS2 is backward compatable?? Just kidding. I was a late buyer, so I never had an original playstation. I went straight from my Coleco to PS2. In renting or buying games, I've never seen any original PS games that got my attention enough to want them.

I'm sure there are plenty of folks out there that had a PS then bought a PS2, and wanted to continue playing their games. It's much like the PC gaming market. There were plenty of people playing their DOS based games, who wanted to continue playing them on their Win95 boxes. Eventually, that number becomes a minority, but eventually those games get abandon for the newer/better/faster/prettier games. Well, except for those hardcore users who still play Atari games on their Windows 2600 emulators. :)

Cam you play your original Nintendo games on a Game Cube? Nope. Newer consoles mean newer games. If you are really hell-bent on playing your older games, plug that old console back in.

It doesn't really matter to me, I wouldn't own a Xbox. When I went shopping for new game consoles, every time I tried out an Xbox in the stores, they were either crashed, or would crash while I was playing the game. That's anything but impressive. The Xbox was the only game consle in most stores that I went to, with a reset button that customers could press. For me, it was a decision between PS2 and Game Cube, and I got the PS2 because the rental section at my local Blockbuster had/has more PS2 games.

Re:Used it?

[NanoGator]

"I think I've played more PS1 games on my PS2 than normal PS2 games."

Think that little tidbit of info will affect whether or not you buy a PS3?

don't forget the wife factor

[westphalia999]

It was the only selling point for my wife when I got my PS2. She wanted a gamecube and didn't like any PS2 games; thankfully she founds lots of PS1 games that she enjoyed and I got my PS2. :)

If the XBOX weren't so big, I wouldn't care.

[unfortunateson]

My sons typically keep four consoles plugged into the set in the family room at any given time. This week, it's XBOX, SNES, NES, Genesis. Previously, the PlayStation took the place of the Genesis. When they get bored, it'll change again. All but the XBOX daisy-chain on the RF input to the tube.

Most of those consoles aren't very big (the NES is a 2nd-generation unit with the sloping top surface). I wouldn't want to put another XBOX-sized thing in that cabinet. Heck, I can get mini-ATX lan-party boxen smaller than that.

On the other hand, without a hard drive, the XENON/XBOX2 could be significantly smaller and cheaper than the next Sony box, which is designed to be a whole home entertainment box.

My guess? Microsoft is bowing to the pressure of the media companies to not build a media box that could be a PVR, hence no drive. Why they switched to ATI and PowerPC, I haven't a clue. Hmm.. perhaps we'll see Mac-based emulators of the XENON?

Re:Used it?

[twilightzero]

Same here. I never owned a PS1 at all but that was a HUGE part of my deicison to get a PS2. I wanted some games from the PS2 *coughfinalfantasyXcough* but I loved the fact that I could go back and play all these PS1 games that I missed. Several of my friends have huge PS1 libraries so it was heaven for me to go through and experience all this stuff I previously wished I could play.

Re:Used it?

[zariok]

I have a 1st generation PS2 (ie got it the DAY it came out)... it barely plays ANY PS1 games.

I noticed when purchasing the DVD Remote, it "upgraded" the DVD software by placing a new version on the memory card, but have yet to find something what "updates" the PS1 emulator/driver.

I started picking up some oldie, but goodie, games that I can't even play due to not owning a PS1 anymore. Those include the afore mentioned Castlevania, various Mega Mans and MK Trilogy.

Any thoughts?

XBox2 - What's the (Selling) Point?

[Jtheletter]

I wrote a rant about this the last time the whole XBox2 (hereafter: X2) backwards compatability subject came up, and my thoughts still haven't changed.

If the X2 is not backwards compatable then M$ needs to demonstrate to gamers, even in their current user base, that there is some huge compelling reason to buy an X2 at all.

With PS1/PS2 the prior games base was a big soft cushion that gauranteed that if all else failed you already liked this system, but on top of that there was a serious upgrade to graphics and sound that came with it. For non-backwards-compatible consoles such as NES to SNES to N64 there were literally exponential increases in processing power which made up for a lack of compatability.

At this point in the console world we are hitting diminishing returns. The current generation is already extremely powerful, and one is left to wonder what the next gen has left to offer us. Short of Full Motion Video quality graphics, I'd argue there's not a whole hell of a lot.
We're probably not going to see some incredibly innovative and widely-enjoyed new form of control, or gameplay, or even game genre. Let's face it, you're gonna be playing Splinter Cell: Pandora Next Week Sometime, Halo 3, and Other Popular Game Part 2+ on your new X2, and even then w/o backwards compatability the game base will be tiny compared to what's already available for the Xbox.

First adopters can't be stopped, hell I'd think at this point they're a standard in the equation used to predict new console sales. Geeks will be geeks, a certain set of people will buy it cuz it's new. But after that people with an XBox/GC/PS2 are gonna be looking at $500+ to get the new system and 2 games, or they could spend half that and get 8 new titles for their still-damn-fine-quality systems.
For people that have no system at all - parents with kids just now old enough to want a gaming system, ppl with new spare income, whatever - the price difference between a new X2 system with no used games market, and an XBox at the new MSRP of $99 with 100 used titles available in the bin next to it, it's no question - the cheaper system still kicks more than enough ass to be worthwhile. (we're not counting spoiled kids who neeeeeeeed the newest toys, they all should be shot anyway if they only reason they need thing A over thing B is because Bobby next door has thing A)

The other point, made by many a poster already, is that of space. I friggin love Halo, I will worship Halo 2, and I will want to play both for a long time to come. But now you tell me I need to keep 2 cubic feet of space free in addition to the spot for the X2, oh and different controllers too you say? Even as a devoted XBox fan, I can't agree with this line of thinking at all. At every marketable point, in every way, an X2 that is not backwards compatible cannot possible shake up the console market and win this for M$.

So tell me, please, Microsoft; why the hell do I want your new machine?

Play PSOne games on the PS/2 all the time

[Xenophon Fenderson,]

In fact, backwards compatibility was one of the PS/2's selling points. I didn't want to have to buy yet another console in order to play some of the older games, like Jedi Power Battles or Metal Gear Solid.

backwards compatibility -- who benefits

[Shaleh]

Think about this for a minute. People saying "man, I bought plenty of ps1 games for my ps2" probably bought them at a used game store. So no licensee received any money. Killing backwards compatibility means people HAVE to buy games new, from licensees. This makes the game people more money and it makes Microsoft more money. All Microsoft has to do is recreate their success with Halo on some new game and the mindless masses will buy the system just to play it.

PS2 Backwards compatiblity

[CPlusPlusOwnsYou]

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

Yes, maybe two or more years ago. I never owned an original Playstation and liked some of the games (tony hawk 1 & 2, gran turismo 1 & 2, final fantasy 7 & 9 to name a few). I never owned a dvd player either. So when I bought my PS2, I got a 3-in-1 deal and it was well worth it. I never play any PS1 games anymore since i have about 25 PS2 games (Playstation2 titles are way better then Xbox IMO)

Trade-in, Trade-up

[DeadBugs]

A lot of people either traded in or sold their PS1 console to buy a shiny new PS2 console.

Not only did they get money back (or at least a discount) towards a new console, they already had a library of games to play while getting in on some early new console action.

This may not affect sales of the XboX2 in the long run. But a lot of gamers (including me) will wait for the 2nd or 3rd price drop to get a new XboX2. However, by then they may have invested too much in a PS3 and just skip MS.

Incredible

[ksilebo]

This move by MS is really stupid. They're shooting themselves in the foot. Nintendo didn't exactly do this (N64 -> GameCube), but at least they have a sufficient market of games that people actually want to play. The only thing that Xbox really has going for it is perhaps Halo 2, it basically dropped out of the sky with no existing franchise of games to base itself upon.

If the PS2 did not have the backwards compatibility, it would have prevented a lot of people from purchasing it right off the bat. I almost ditched my PS1 instantaneously right after the first price drop. I play a lot of the older titles for PS1 on my PS2, with the PS2 games mixed in. I do miss my hardware Gameshark though.

Re:More speculation

[*weasel]

The speculation is that they're going for several gig of flash ram instead of a hard drive.

The idea is to get away from moving parts that keep costs up. Flash memory has just about all the desireable features of a disk - except rewrite lifespan. Flash is faster and follows semiconductor economies of scale (gets cheaper, like chips; not bigger like discs). It just can't be used for swap space and you can count the number of titles that use it for that on one hand.
(the frequent rewrites of swap usage would burn through flash memory so fast consumers would sue)

But there's no reason they can't have the huge save games, custom soundtracks and downloadable content.

And if they allow the neXtBox to access songs/video from a network share/feed, I'll be its number 1 fan even without backwards compat.

Hell, no other the only other 'under the tv' console had backwards compat, and they did fine. Backwards compat would kick ass, but I sincerely doubt it's a deal-breaker for a significant portion of gamers. I mean... it's not like the XBox itself was backwards compatible with anything.

If it has the games, the gamers will follow.

What if it's not $500?

[Crag]

What if the Xbox2 could be had for less than $150? The rumors say it's going to run on a PowerPC and have no hard drive. That sounds a lot like a GameCube to me. Throwing away all the PC crap in the X1 might allow them to drop the cost drastically. It might also simplify development, making the platform slightly more attractive to console game writers. Obviously this is pure speculation, but maybe the gambit they're making is that they can come out with something which is the cheapest, most beautiful, and easiest to develop for, and that more games will be ported to it if it's that accessible.

Or they could just be stupid.

Microsoft ain't Nintendo

[drdreff]

Nintendo is the only console make that can get away with building a new box that is not compatible with the last generation games. But yet they maintained compatibility whith CBG when they released GBA.

I didn't and won't buy a new platform that requires me to lose my investment in the title's I've already purchased. Count me in the 10% Though I never bought a PSOne it is very important to me and my kids to be able to play the cheaper and older titles on the PSTwo.

I didn't invite the Nintedo64 into my house, but since it's here, it serves to remind me why I don't have a Nintendo GameCube. Not only does that box leave out the DVD player (a requirement I would think for any console today) but there was no potential for playing N64 games.

So the gamnecube still comes not into my house.

Thoughts

[bholub]

I own an Xbox, I don't own a PS2... however I HAVE both (and most other systems you can think of) between me and my roommates. We play all of them. I don't particularly favor any one over the others, they all have their ups and downs.

About the backwards compatibility thing, I would guess that 90% of the 10% of PS2 people that cared about backwards compatibility probably already owned a PS1. I mean if I didn't have a PS1, I wouldn't buy a PS2 and then go out and buy PS1 games...

Following that logic, chances are the only people that care about backwards compatibility in the Xbox Next already own an Xbox. Also, chances are if people are happy with their Xbox they'll buy an Xbox2 - if they're not, they wont... backwards compatible or not.

The only real reason I'm hoping for backwards compatibility in the Xbox Next is because my Xbox is so beat up and used that it's becoming more and more flakey. And for Halo 2, which if it's anything like Halo 1 I'll be wanting to play it for a long long time. Also Rallisport Challenge 2.

Ehhhhhh.........

Virtual PC and the Xbox 2

[moo083]

Virtual PC was recently added to the list of software bought out by Microsoft. For those of you don't know, it emulates an x86 machine. Currently there is no hardware acceleration support, but the new version coming out I think at the end of the year will have this feature. The Xbox 2 has a processor similar to the Powermac G5....
What does this mean?
I would assume that this means they bought out the technology not only to be able to sell it to Mac users themselves, but also to use it for the Xbox 2 to emulate old games since the first Xbox uses a PC processor.

Re:Missing the point

[king-manic]

First, if you want to play an XBOX game, use an XBOX. If you want to play an XBOX Next game, use an XBOX. I don't think I should be able to play Nintindo 16 bit games on a Game Cube without buying a compatible cartredge. This idea that everything is on a glorified DVD has people thinking they should just work in everything. Now excuse me while I go plug my Genesis up and throw in a Master's Cartredge.

why? Why not have BW compat all the way back? if it costs little why not have it as a feature? It mean your library will last as long as the media and not the machine (the machines break down before the games do 90% of the time). My nintendo is dead. My PS1 is on it's last legs. My genesis is also dead. My SNES is just barely hanging on. I'd liek to still play FF6 when it eventually dies.

Re:Well I dunno

[Dachannien]

Wait - you are forgetting three systems here: while clearly not as popular as the systems you mention above, the Atari 7800 was backwards-compatible with the 2600 (but not the 5200... go figure) and the Turbo Duo was backwards-compatible with the TurboGrafx 16 and the TG-CD.

Don't forget that Coleco considered the possibility of leveraging the huge Atari 2600 game library important enough to make, get sued by Atari for, and then pay royalties to Atari on, their first expansion module for the ColecoVision console.

Re:Missing the point

[Foreign16]

Ok, didn't want to bring this up but it's well known that game companies make money off the games. Why would they even think of offering backwards compatability if they can just charge you again for a slightly altered version of what you had?

Everyone thinks the consumer has the say in this backwards compatability stuff. Microsoft and others are right to try and make money off games when they're selling their consoles at a loss. They've got to make money somehow or we wouldn't have consoles at all.

Short econ lesson. Would you buy a $500 console so the games would be 20 bucks each? Probably not and the ones that did wouldn't buy more than one. This maxes out the profit based solely on the unit and has a set quantity.

Now look at the current model. Offer a console at lower than cost and then charge 50/game which keep coming out well after the console is finalized. There is a better market for games at $50 than consoles at $500.

Point is that the business people aren't stupid. They have this billion industry pinned and when they choose not put backwards compatability in a console, they do it from a econmical stance.

Why do companies not use interchangable parts. The case scenarios go on and on.

Helps the XBox now, prevents sales cannibalization

[SuperKendall]

If you knew the XBox NeXT was supposed to be out in 2005, and didn't have one now... you might very well wait for 2005 to play a game like Halo 2 rather than buy an "obsolete" console now (as any console become the very moment a release date is issued for the next model).

So by stating it's not backwards compatible, they avoid cannibalizing some XBox sales now.

I still think in the long run it will hurt them with the next console, and at best they'll be able to sell as many of the next versions of the console as they have now.

The paranoid among you might think that perhaps they are claiming lack of backwards compatibility now, only to offer it later after the threat of sales cannibalizations is gone - but the architectural differences are just too vast to really offer such a thing.

I really wonder if Sony is going to offer backwards compatibility in the PS3, they almost have no choice it would seem.

If the PS3 does offer backwards compatibility, I think they may well become as ubiquitous as TV sets.

Of course, don't forget...

[diamondsw]

...that the Playstation 2's backwards compatibility was vastly simplified since it used the Playstation 1's main CPU as its audio chip. So when you stick in a PS1 game, it cleverly routes main CPU functions over there, which results in extremely good compatibility without the need for messy and expensive (processor and development-wise) emulation.

Backward compatibility for the XBox2 (if rumors are to be believed) is much more of a herculean task, particularly since with video games people expect it to Just Work (even moreso than a Mac). No if's and's or but's. While I agree that backwards compatibility is a very important feature (especially at launch), it's by no means a trivial one, particularly given the public falling out between Microsoft and NVidia.