Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Xbox Titles Added to 360 List

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the backwards-compatability-in-a-chocolate-egg dept.

Eurogamer reports that Microsoft will be adding more titles to its list of backwards compatible games. From the article: "Microsoft has made a minor update to the Xbox 360 backwards compatibility list, adding patches to allow three new titles to run on the new console - namely Black, Star Wars Battlefront II, and Winning Eleven 9. The update, which is the first change to the list of backwards compatible titles in several months, also fixes issues with a number of games which previously worked with the Xbox 360 but had bugs in the compatibility code, including Ninja Gaiden, Fable, Half-Life 2 and GTA San Andreas."

95 comments

  1. KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... At least when I tried them, there were pretty constant hiccups in camera movement and pauses when trying to do real-time style combat.. Halo 2 is pretty tight though, even in splitscreen.

    I was thinking of getting a 360 to play XBL Call of Duty with the nephews, but they'll have to live with Halo 2 until I get a HD 1080p set..

    1. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by /ASCII · · Score: 1

      Yeah, not to mention the constant sound hiccups, the fact that audio goes dead occasionally, the crashes and the fact that the character movement animations sometimes dies, leaving your Jedi 'floating through space' when you walk.

      And I was so looking forward to play Jade Empire in 720p. :-(

      --
      Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
    2. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by JordanL · · Score: 1

      Except for the 360 exports in 1080i as its highest resolution. ;-)

      --
      FanFictionRecs.net
    3. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by Osty · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was thinking of getting a 360 to play XBL Call of Duty with the nephews, but they'll have to live with Halo 2 until I get a HD 1080p set..

      Why would you waste your money on a 1080p set when the Xbox 360 only does 720p/1080i? Not only that, (practically) nothing else does 1080p either, and most 1080p TVs don't accept 1080p signals even if you had a source to drive them. Worse, for those few sets that do handle 1080p input, the framerate of 1080p is around 25fps-30fps. Sufficient for TV and movies, not so great for video gaming. Finally, add in the fact that scaling can take some time (milliseconds, but enough to lag audio or gameplay) depending on the set, and that there's nothing available in the TV's native 1080p source, you're basically never going to use the TV in it's most optimal native mode.

      And that's not even getting into any of the other issues, like 1080p sets that aren't even 1080p (or, they are 1080p in that they have a full 1080 pixel vertical resolution, but use a technique called "wobulation" to fake 1920 horizontal pixels using a DMD (Digital Micro Device, the display source for DLP sets) with only 960 horizontal pixels).

      I'm all for being an early adopter. I bought an HDTV way back in 2001 (and replaced it with a 720p DLP set this past November), which may not have been right on the bleeding edge but it was close. However, I just can't see spending $1000-2000 more to be an earlier adopter of 1080p when I'm virtually guaranteed to have to replace the set in 2-3 years since what I buy today isn't really 1080p at all.

    4. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then do so. Jade Empire works great on the 360, with only a couple of issues that I have noticed. The framerate sometimes drops during conversations, but that's not too big of a deal (and most of the time it doesn't happen). For some reason a texture doesn't get loaded properly in one particular area. I haven't noticed any problems with sound, and combat runs nice and smooth.

      I haven't played the entire game on the 360, so I suppose there could be other issues I haven't seen. But don't assume it will play badly just because KOTOR does.

    5. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

      Why would you waste your money on a 1080p set when the Xbox 360 only does 720p/1080i?

      So I can play World of Warcraft on it?

      1080p is the highest resolution there will be for at least 10-15 years. Why buy a set which you'll have to junk when you have upgrade lust?

    6. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by Osty · · Score: 1

      1080p is the highest resolution there will be for at least 10-15 years. Why buy a set which you'll have to junk when you have upgrade lust?

      But 1080p as a standard is not fully fleshed out, you have to really hunt to find a TV that will actually accept a 1080p input, and even then it may not accept a non-HDCP input (1080p only being supported via HDMI). Good luck getting a PC to display a 1920x1080 signal with HDCP.

      I'd rather save $1000-2000 now and buy a 720p set, and then upgrade to 1080p in a couple years when the standards have been hashed out, the technology has actually caught up (full horizontal resolution rather than wobulation, accepts 1080p signals on all relevant inputs, no HDCP requirement, etc), and content exists (Blu-ray or HD-DVD, game consoles actually supporting 1080p (I don't really believe the PS3 will), etc). If I bought a 1080p set today, I'd have to buy a new one in a couple years anyway, so why waste the money?

    7. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

      But 1080p as a standard is not fully fleshed out, you have to really hunt to find a TV that will actually accept a 1080p input, and even then it may not accept a non-HDCP input (1080p only being supported via HDMI).

      I have.

      Now I just need enough space for one...

    8. Re:KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you fucktard hows that different from kotorII on an original xbox, the game is buggy as anyway.

  2. I miss real backwards compatibility by dalmiroy2k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I miss the days when "Backwards compatibility" were a hardware feature and not some kind of emulation that requires constant Internet updates...

    1. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by Sp0r · · Score: 1

      You mean like MS's other backward compatible programs - http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/28/091 2246.

      --
      I am Sp0r, Scourge of the Cosmos!
    2. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by JordanL · · Score: 1

      C'mon, that's how Microsoft has maintained such quality in Windows!

      --
      FanFictionRecs.net
    3. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by wampus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Given the radically different architecture between the two consoles, I think it is damn impressive that they were able to achieve the number of titles that do play on the 360.

      Would you rather see an Xbox 360 that is nothing more than a faster Intel CPU with a faster Nvidia GPU and more RAM? It may hurt a bit at first to break full backwards compatibility, but you can't drag your legacy stuff along indefinitely, eventually the cruft builds up. I'd like to think that MS learned this lesson with Windows.

    4. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by rholliday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally I'd rather the hardware continue to advance as needed and have backwards compatibility be a secondary objective. I don't want my (supposedly) cutting-edge machine hampered by being forced to handle 5-year old technology. If they can have it both ways by some handy-dandy emulation, then good for them.

      --
      Xbox reviews.. We think they're funny.
    5. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 4, Informative

      Like on the old Nintendo and Sega systems? Oh right, they weren't BC.

      Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles. The only major system to have done it before now was PS2 with PS1. So there really weren't ever any good ol' days for this feature.

    6. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gameboy ring any bells?

    7. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by mjhacker · · Score: 1

      You miss the days?

      PS2 is absolutely 100% compatible with PS. And PS3 will be absolutely 100% campatible with PS2 and PS. Another example? Gameboy Advance is completely compatible with old Gameboy games, and the Nintendo DS, while it's compatibility is limited to GBA games, it still plays every GBA game perfectly. So, if you want backwards compatibility, then don't buy a 360.

    8. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by discoalucardx · · Score: 1

      PS2 is like 99% compatible. Some anthologies of old games won't work (like some of the Midway/Williams packs) and certain games like Tomba 2 don't work either. My GBA crashed on at least one GBC game. Oddly enough this never happened on the Gameboy Player so who knows. I am pretty sure there was at least one or two GBC games that don't work with the GBA, or maybe I'm thinking of just the SP. Regardless, I am picking nits here, but you can't say 100% because that's not quite true.

    9. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by blincoln · · Score: 1

      Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles.

      The Atari 7800 was backwards-compatible with the 2600 out of the box.

      The Atari 5200, ColecoVision, and IntelliVision all had add-on modules to play 2600 games (although this was basically just a 2600 that used the controllers and video output of the newer console).

      Similarly, the Sega Genesis had an add-on module to play Master System games.

      As someone else mentioned, the Gameboy has always been backwards-compatible.

      So, no, it's not really a new idea.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    10. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 1

      It is a new idea as far as being expected behavior. For consoles. The Atari backwards compatibility was an exception rather than the rule. Gameboy compatibility is a different affair, because that's not really console gaming. And the others you mention involve add-on modules, which isn't really system backwards compatibility. It's BC with a peripheral, which is something else entirely (especially for the ones that provide compatibility with games from another system). You're talking about add-on emulators, not system backwards compatibility.

      To put it in perspective, Nintendo and Sega each produced 4 consoles over the lifetime of console videogaming. 3 of each were successors to an existing system. None of them offered backwards compatibility. That's 6 major consoles with the potential for BC with no BC. Sony has released 2 consoles, and their first successor did have BC. That's the first major console that actually offered it as a feature. So out of the following consoles, which make up the bulk of console history, only one offered it as a feature, hardware or otherwise:

      Super Nintendo - no BC
      Genesis - no BC (unless you purchased a peripheral, which didn't come with the system and didn't come out when the system was first released)
      Nintendo 64 - no BC
      Saturn - no BC
      Dreamcast - no BC
      Gamecube - no BC
      PS2 - BC

      So to say you missed the old days of BC is, statistically speaking, revisionist history.

    11. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      The PS2 wasn't exactly hindered by it's backwards compatibility with the PS1, and it will very likely be the PS3's backwards compatibility with the PS2 that saves the PS3 from total failure. (That is, I wouldn't count on very many must have PS3 first generation titles).

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    12. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      Well the xbox 360 was never really meant to be backwards compatable is was a last minute panic thing. With the estimates for the end of game licences and the cessation of production of the original in the first quarter of next year, there is a lot of resistance from game producers and retailers about sales resistance that will create (as well as range of games that have as yet to generate a postive return - like duh - being a microsoft partner is just the right to be screwed whilst having to sign a non-disclosure agreement about it).

      Microsoft's objective was clear, force the customers to drop the old console as soon a possible and replace their old game titles with new licence paying versions (ala office and windows), their inability to dominate the console market forced them to provide token compatability or lose against Sony.

      The problems thay are having with the 360, regardless of their marketing hype (or how many units have been sold to customers, not how many units have been sold to retailers) and the lack of game sales is forcing them to pay more attention to the customers (for the time being, it is a goal only of course, they did not say the will actually achieve full compatability for all the original titles).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the Gameboy is just a minor player in the videogame scene. Not.

    14. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 1

      irrelevant (the size of the gameboy market). Gameboy is huge in gaming, as are PCs. But we're talking about console compatibility.

      Oh nevermind. You'll just disagree with me anyway.

    15. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      The Gameboy is a video game console. It is a piece of computer hardware designed (primarily) to play video games through the use of interchangeable cartridges/discs/cards. The fact that it can run on batteries and doesn't need a TV is irrelevant.

    16. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 1

      OK, fine, you win, the Gameboy is a console. So now we've got

      Atari 7800 - BC
      Jaguar - not BC
      Genesis - not BC without accessory
      Super Nintendo - not BC
      Saturn - not BC
      Nintendo64 - not BC
      Dreamcast - not BC
      Gamecube - not BC
      PS2 - BC
      Gameboy Advance - BC
      Nintendo DS - BC

      So you've got 4 out of 11 that are backwards compatible in pretty much the history of gaming consoles. That's not exactly a golden heyday of backwards compatibility now, is it?

      The numbers you'll see in the future will change that, of course, because now it's considered par for the course, but the idea that backwards compatibility is a given based on past history is false. The idea that it is a given is a recent phenomenon, mostly established by the PS2 and, as you point out, the gameboy line.

    17. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      And the others you mention involve add-on modules, which isn't really system backwards compatibility.

      The XC requires the harddrive for playing XB titles...

      That adapter for the Mega Drive could be ommitted if you casemodded the system instead, AFAIK the MD itself provided the backwards compatibility but the cart slot was not compatible.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    18. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 1

      fine but I don't see how that changes my point

    19. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by cluke · · Score: 1

      How about we phrase it this way and see if it sounds any different:

      The two most successful consoles of all time have been backwardly compatible.

      And the PS3 is going to be. Hence Microsoft's pretence at BC, it's what the customer expects these days - they can't afford not to have it.

    20. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Now you're changing your argument. You originally said:

      <i>Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles. The only major system to have done it before now was PS2 with PS1. So there really weren't ever any good ol' days for this feature.</i>

      As I and others have pointed out, both your points here are wrong. Backwards-compatibility is not new, the Atari 7800 did it, and several older consoles (Genesis, Super NES) had hardware emulation through add-ons. Also, backwards-compatibility has been used in major systems, namely the Gameboy line.

    21. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "AFAIK the MD itself provided the backwards compatibility but the cart slot was not compatible."

      Yes, in the same way as Sony did with the PS2, Sega designed the MD to use the MS CPU for secondary tasks, thus making backwards compatibility a simple matter of a cartridge adapter. Other consoles, like the TurboDuo could also play the older TurboGrafx games.

    22. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by drewmca · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I should have been clearer. The idea that backwards compatibility is an EXPECTED feature is new. It has popped up from time to time in the past but has never been a bullet point feature for a console until the PS2 did it, and the GBA after it (or maybe vice versa, though neither really had much influence on the other because they're in different markets). This generation of consoles (xbox360, ps3, rev) is the first generation where is was expected, and where companies got flak when they didn't promise it.

      The original post was missing the "old days" of BC. If that's the case, he was missing the Atari 7800, because that's the only real console that offered BC in the past. Somehow, I doubt anyone misses the good old days of the 7800. BC has never been, until recently, a major feature of consoles. And no, add-ons just don't count. Not one of those add-ons came out with the system in question, and they had very little market penetration. Saying you miss the days of BC is like saying you miss the good old days of pixel shading.

      And BTW, you're wrong.

    23. Re:I miss real backwards compatibility by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      So just go and change your argument again, and then make baseless assertions about what I said. Just go ahead and do that. Oh wait, looks like you already did.

  3. You know you're in trouble when... by radical_dementia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...you have to release bug fix patches for a console.

    Not having to worry about bugs, installations, and updates are major factors in what makes consoles more appealing than PCs for gaming. It seems to me Microsoft is failing to realize this.

    1. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by Leiterfluid · · Score: 1

      Considering backwards compatibility was something they initially wasn't planning on implementing or supporting, I would think that griping about bugs for an optional feature is really nitpicking.

    2. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by Leiterfluid · · Score: 1

      er... weren't planning on supporting. Damn me for not previewing.

    3. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But Microsoft is simply bringing the PC experience to console players! Just think of the million of console gamers who never got to install drivers, tweak video cards and overclock their systems. They have truly missed out on the Microsoft Gamer Experience, and this is what Microsoft is all about!

      In fact, all these so-called "bugs" you heard about (overheating power bricks, scratched disks, dubious backwards compatability) are not bugs at all, but part of a much larger plan to let XBox 360 oweners in on the Microsoft Gamer Experience.

      By the way, you would be a fool to buy a PS3 or Revolution because these systems will not offer the Microsoft Gamer Experience.

    4. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been a been a computer and console gamer going all the way back to before the 2600. I've never had a console game crash on me ever and I've owned the majority of systems that have been sold. There are only two real bugs I've encountered that I can think of. One saving glitch in Prince of Persia Sands of Time and one problem with textures getting screwed up in the original Crash Bandicoot when I managed to get into an area where I wasn't supposed to.

      The 360 and 360 games are out of control when it comes to crash bugs. It is so bad with 360 games that I hear other players talking about their system working perfectly because they are 'only getting crashes once in a while'.

      Both the backwards compatibility and game bug/crash situation are a complete mess. It is like Microsoft is just bypassing all the standard quality checking that all other consoles go through. I can't imagine how much longer Xbox owners are going to put up with utter lack of execution from Microsoft.

    5. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by deuterium · · Score: 1

      Not that any games should be excused for having bugs in them, but I don't think that this is a Microsoft issue. Aside from the whole fiasco of not removing the plastic seals on the heatsinks, the system is fine. What I suspect is that this is an inevitable cost of the increasing complexity of gaming code. Games of generations past didn't have physics engines or advanced AI or pixel shading routines or multithreaded designs. I predict that games for the PS3 will have just as many title bugs as games on the 360, and the next generation will have a few more, etc. The possible permutations of variable states in a next-gen game are just getting beyond the capacity of perfect beta testing.

    6. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by supabeast! · · Score: 1

      Console games have always been buggy - if I had the time I could sit down and write a massive list of all the console games with horrible bugs, even crash bugs, going back to early NES releases. IMHO, finally being able to patch the damned things beats the hell out of paying $50 for a game, not being able to return it, and never being able to do anything with bugs aside from getting used t them.

    7. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by SilentChris · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm going to put this nicely. You're an idiot.

      MS decided to go with emulation because the hardware alternative (sticking an Intel chipset and nVidia graphics core) was unpalatable. It's the exact same technique Revolution is going to use to emulate 20-year old consoles, and Sony will likely do the same thing.

      There's no way to get an emulator completely right the first try. Period. End of story. There's always going to be an instruction here or a game there that doesn't work the way it should. Emulators need updates. Why do you think the NES emulation scene, for example, still releases updates for palattes?

      Software emulation is the best solution to get older games to play without spending the extra money to include older hardware. Software updates are the best way to keep those emulators up to snuff.

      In the case of the Xbox 360, the updates are completely seamless. You start the machine up, it says it needs an update, it installs it, you get back to gaming. Nintendo will likely do the same thing.

      If the choice is between that and having a buggy emulator (remember, no such thing as a perfect emulator when it's released) or driving up the price of the console, I'll take the seamless updates, thanks.

    8. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by powerlord · · Score: 1
      MS decided to go with emulation because the hardware alternative (sticking an Intel chipset and nVidia graphics core) was unpalatable. It's the exact same technique Revolution is going to use to emulate 20-year old consoles, and Sony will likely do the same thing.


      Sony may do something similar, but what made them decide to do this in the PS2, was that they were already including the chips that made up the PS1 processor (but using them in a different capacity) inside the box. I imagine that made it easier to switch to an emulation mode since they didn't have to emulate the underlying hardware, just the interface layer. I've heard rumors that the PS3 will include the PS2 chipset (and possibly the PS1 chipset as well), again, performing a different roll. If true this would provide them the same advantage in allowing backward compatibility that, while not 100% (very few things are), should hopefully be better than the XBox360's (not that thats saying much).
      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    9. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      The main reason why companies don't put the older hardware in is cost. If there's 2 versions of a console, one that has software emulation and one that has hardware emulation for $50 more, I'll take the software version. Not only am I saving $50, but I'm also ensuring if any updates need to be made I can do so.

      People seem to forget that there was some major problems with PS2 emulation (which, like you said, used a combination of the PS1 hardware and software). Any time you go the hardware route, you run the risk of some consoles being permenantly gimped. You also, like I said, have to charge the consumer more.

      To date, I can think of only one series of systems that have done hardware emulation consistently, and that's Game Boy. Even there, Nintendo quietly phases out older generations as they release new ones (both the DS and Game Boy Micro won't play original Game Boy games). They were going to go the hardware route with the SNES but bowed out.

    10. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was that a lame attempt at FUD or are you actually that fucking stupid to believe the garbage you just posted?

    11. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      Why do you think the NES emulation scene, for example, still releases updates for palattes?

      This isn't really a valid point. Palettes have nothing to do with the actual machine emulation, but more with the difference between output devices (TVs vs. computer monitors). It's a matter of aesthetics rather than technical correctness.

      However, it's important to note that "mature" emulators for old systems are still being improved upon. This is of course similar to your statement that it's pretty much impossible to emulate something correctly the first time.

    12. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      It's not a flipping optional feature, they've sold / marketed the product to do it, how they do it WE DON'T CARE we just want it to work.

      To add to that the PS2 is nearly 6 years old or so, with a HUGE library of games and no replacement on the shelves yet.

      The Xbox is 4.5? nearly 5 years old, already has a replacement and has a medium library of games- the least these people can do is make it backwards compatible, especially seeing as some of the games on the Xbox 1 really aren't looking dated to be honest.

    13. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      The palattes aren't really an aesthetic matter. If they aren't right the screen can become completely garbled to the point that the game is unplayable. To this day many emulators have difficulty with games like Castlevania III because of this (although a few have gotten the majority of the palattes right).

    14. Re:You know you're in trouble when... by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      I dunno dude, my understanding of palettes is that they are a bunch of color values that attempt to recreate the colors you would see "naturally occurring" on a TV or whatever kind of screen the console in question natively uses. And they are required because running a (let's say NES) emulator on a computer next to a real NES running on a TV will give you different colors. So you could technically call it "emulation", but it's more emulating a TV than the actual hardware.

      Regarding garbling, that has nothing to do with palettes. It has to do with either the hardware of the system or hardware present in the game cartridge. This is why Castlevania III is a hard game to emulate, namely because it used in-cart add-on chips to create some of the effects.

  4. yeah, but you knew this was coming by aendeuryu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You knew this was coming once they started adding hard drives into the console. What do you need for a save game? A whole bunch of state variables? That's not really data intensive. The moment I heard that the first XBox was coming out with a hard drive, my first reaction was "Oh boy, here comes the patches." Yes, I do think it's better to get save games from a hard drive than some plug-in storage device, but the size of the hard drives made it obvious that they were looking to use it for more than just save games.

    1. Re:yeah, but you knew this was coming by nb+caffeine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Caching on the original Xbox sped up quite a few games. I recall the load screens in Vice City being alot shorter than in the ps2 version. I thought it was a good use of the technology. As far as the hard drive size, I want full games. A few patches don't really require a 20 gb HDD.

      --

      "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
    2. Re:yeah, but you knew this was coming by aendeuryu · · Score: 1

      Good point. Hadn't thought of that.

      Mods, please mod down grandparent appropriately.

    3. Re:yeah, but you knew this was coming by blincoln · · Score: 1

      What do you need for a save game? A whole bunch of state variables? That's not really data intensive.

      Gamers have gotten a lot less tolerant of save points, and save-anywhere functionality requires much more space.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  5. Just three? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is not a big number. That is a small number. And didn't Black come out *after* the XBox 360? You'd think they'd have an easier time doing emulation if the games are being developed at the same time as the emulation is.

  6. SSX3 by nb+caffeine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just saw this in the morning so I haven't had a chance to check it out yet, but hopefully they fixed the issues with ssx3. It technically would load and you'd be able to play, but saving didn't work and there was some serious slowdowns in play. I also see they updated Forza, which had some minor slowdowns, and when racing at 150 mph, that did not help my already questioable racing skills :)

    Gonna be shredding it up on the mountain tonight :)

    --

    "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
    1. Re:SSX3 by Osty · · Score: 2, Informative

      I also see they updated Forza, which had some minor slowdowns, and when racing at 150 mph, that did not help my already questioable racing skills.

      The only slowdown I saw on Forza prior to this update was when I raced in an in-car view with the rearview mirror turned on (which is how I race, so it happened all the time). Turning off the rearview mirror removed all of the slowdown issues I had. This update fixed the issue so now I can race with my rearview mirror turned back on, but the game was definitely playable before. You just to be OCD about looking behind you since you had no rearview mirror.

    2. Re:SSX3 by nb+caffeine · · Score: 1

      That is also how I play, and the rearview is a crutch I'm not willing to give up. Thanks for confirming that it's fixed, you just made the last 4 hours of work that much longer!

      --

      "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
  7. Mech Assault by taxman_10m · · Score: 1

    I wish they'd get Mech Assault I & II working.

  8. Dark Days For The 360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    This 'update' is just about the final straw for me and my 360. I feel like an idiot for believing Microsoft would come through with something major and we would all be playing flawless versions of every big name Xbox title by now.

    There has been a major change of tone among most other 360 owners I know and around the Net. Very much a feeling of despair and how could so many things have gone so wrong with the system.

    Unless there is something Earth-shattering from Microsoft at E3 I don't think there is any reasonable hope for the system. Most of the stuff I want to play is coming out for the pc too anyway.

    1. Re:Dark Days For The 360 by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      Well you let us know when some of those mythical 360 games are released.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    2. Re:Dark Days For The 360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So, to summarize:

      If I buy a PS2, or a PS3, or a Nintendo Revolution, or a Nintendo Game Boy Advance, or a Nintendo DS, and I expect the "backward compatible" advertised on the box to mean it's able to play the games from the advertised compatible system, I get exactly what a reasonable consumer in this position would expect.

      If I buy an XBox 360, and I expect the "partially backward compatible" advertised on the box to mean absolutely anything at all, I'm an "idiot" and some guy on the internet is going to yell at me, because apparently in Microsoft-land, advertised features are "bonuses" and we should be grateful the machine boots at all.

      This doesn't really inspire me to feel that buying an XBox 360 is the best choice for me as a consumer. I mean, what other things that one normally expects to receive standard and free from a video game console will turn out, in Microsoft-land, to be "bonuses" that I can't, and shouldn't, expect to actually work?

      I can't play PS2 games on my Gamecube either

      When you bought your Gamecube, did it say on the box, advertising or manual that it would be able to play PS2 games? Because mine didn't.

    3. Re:Dark Days For The 360 by kionel · · Score: 1

      There has been a major change of tone among most other 360 owners I know and around the Net. Very much a feeling of despair and how could so many things have gone so wrong with the system.

      What a complete and utter load of crap.

      Yes, these are "dark days" when Oblivion gets released to rave reviews. These are truly the end-times when the emulation software gets better, not worse. And lo, dogs and cats must be living together because the console continues to gain a foothold in the market.

      Seriously, my son and I have owned a 360 since December and we freaking love it. Does it replace all of our PC gaming? No; it'll never be an RTS platform. But for FPS and hardware-heavy titles like Oblivion it's an amazing, amazing piece of work. So when I read these constant -- and usually completely spurious -- tales of woe about the device ("It overheats!"/"It sucks!"/"It doesn't really do HD!") I wanna just scream.

      --
      "'My Country Right or Wrong'is like saying 'My mother, drunk or sober,'" -- Chesterton
  9. Well, That's Not Entirely True by MikeyTheK · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...The update, which is the first change to the list of backwards compatible titles in several months...

    It might be the first change to THE LIST in several months, but the 360 patch that was released last month added support for Tom Clancey's Ghost Recon II, among others, for the first time, enabling me to stop using my original XBox except for DDR (the dance mats aren't compatible with the 360, so I haven't even bothered to see if the game is). So while the list might have not been updated in a while, the periodic patches have added more backwards compatibility.

    --
    Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
    Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
  10. Mortal Kombat? by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

    I was hoping to see support added for "Deadly Alliance", but it seems that "Decpetion" has even been removed from the list.

    1. Re:Mortal Kombat? by larsoncc · · Score: 1

      According to the Google Cache, Mortal Kombat wasn't on the December list, either.

      I don't recall it ever being on the backwards compat list, but then, I own the MK games on PS2, so I haven't been paying close attention.

      --
      Video Game News, FAQs, etc
    2. Re:Mortal Kombat? by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      I see now, it Deception was on the original list, but it didn't actually work, so it must have been pulled early on.

  11. You think that's bad? by caffeination · · Score: 1

    That's not even the half of it. They're starting to flesh out the content in "patches" now, as well. It's got a good side and a bad side, but I'm sure going to miss the time when the word "release" meant something.

  12. Still missing the bets by fahrvergnugen · · Score: 2, Informative

    Still missing, the two best titles on the console:
    Psychonauts
    Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath

    Damn.

    --
    Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
  13. Does anyone else... by jshackles · · Score: 1
    ...get the impression that Microsoft is using their shoddy "backwords compatibility" to mentally start brainwashing us into thinking that backwards compatibility is bad?

    Look at it this way - for people like me who saw this coming and held on to my original Xbox to play my original Xbox games, they can migrate the masses to the newer console while stile quoting a large install base of the original Xbox.

    It is a sad day for gaming indeed. I'm actually thinking that when it comes to backwards compatibility, Sony and Nintendo will certainly be crowned the victors this time around.

  14. Falling back on Halo, again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless there is something Earth-shattering from Microsoft at E3 I don't think there is any reasonable hope for the system.

    Well, I think we can certainly assume that E3 will bring the announcement of Halo 3, along with the first videos. Even if Halo 3 is two years off, I think we can assume Microsoft will be showing advance videos at E3.

    Halo footage is certain to make a lot of people quite happy, I think. But, on the other hand, I'm not sure how many times Microsoft can play its Halo Hype card before it stops being earth-shattering and starts becoming just another game announcement. I am curious, do you think Halo 3 footage at E3 (assuming we'll be getting it) is enough to lift or dent the miasma that's gradually beginning to settle around the XBox 360?

  15. This is pathetic... by in5ane · · Score: 1

    ..and I'm big Microsoft fanboy. But 3 games? And one I specifically had to dig out and hook up my original Xbox for? C'mon MS, must try harder :)

    1. Re:This is pathetic... by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      If you want to play the games that bad, then why not use your old XBox to play them?

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
  16. Two thoughts... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    1) After M$'s latest Vista F-up, some of the XBox team is headed over to "help" with Vista. Kiss your backwards compatibility goodbye.

    2) "Uh...well, you can buy this XBox 360 with the noisy fan and unreliable power supply here for $300 or the old XBox that just fucking works for $75 off eBay. Either one can play your favorite game."

    1. Re:Two thoughts... by nb+caffeine · · Score: 1

      1) Has been debunked (by a PR guy, yeah i know, so who really knows)

      2) My old Xbox is in my bedroom now, XBMC for my nighttime Divx watching. Its just nicer that I can bust out some of my old faves on the 360. But the kicker is that the 360 can play Xbox 360 games

      --

      "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
    2. Re:Two thoughts... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1
      " 1) Has been debunked (by a PR guy, yeah i know, so who really knows)"

      OK, I'm a smart-ass. Windows backwards compatibility has generally been OK through releases.

      "2) Its just nicer that I can bust out some of my old faves on the 360. But the kicker is that the 360 can play Xbox 360 games"

      Here's the problem, I think. The XBox games that are currently available are not enough of a draw by themselves. So, they have to keep retro-porting the good titles from the old platform. If that's a main part of the XBox 360's appeal, what's the point?

    3. Re:Two thoughts... by nb+caffeine · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say the "main" appeal to the 360 is the original xbox games. In fact, I rarely play anything other than the retail 360 games (and marble blast... mmmmm) on my 360. But it is nice to be able to put in regular xbox games that I have that are less than a year old and play them on my 360. Wireless controllers are nice, and the fact that my original xbox is in another room doesn't help

      --

      "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
  17. You're right... by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    but my Playstation 2 plays Crash Bandicoot flawlessly, just as you would expect when Sony advertised that the Playstation 2 would be compatible with Playstation games. Kind of neat how that works, huh? Isn't that surprising considering that Playstation games weren't designed to play on a Playstation 2?

    What's got everyone's panties in a knot is that Microsoft lists compatibility with original Xbox games as a feature of the Xbox, but the level of compatibility is abysmally low. Wouldn't you be pissed if your Playstation 2 didn't play original Playstation games like Sony said it would? Microsoft is the one pushing the compatibility agenda here with their pronouncement that they expect to have every Xbox title emulated for the Xbox 360. I am sorry that you feel that people who trust Microsoft to deliver Xbox compatibility based on Microsoft's own assertions should just shut up because you consider that Xbox compatibility is just a "bonus".

    1. Re:You're right... by Omeger · · Score: 1

      The PS2 has PSX hardware in it though. The 360 has NO Xbox hardware in it.

    2. Re:You're right... by dtfarmer · · Score: 1

      The PS2 has PSX hardware in it though. The 360 has NO Xbox hardware in it.

      And yet they both advertise backward compatibility on the box. One works, the other ... not so much. Does that seem right to you?

      Remember, microsoft has stated to the press multiple times that they intend to have every Xbox game running and fully playable in emulation on the 360 - 3 new games added in over 3 months since the last update is not an impressive statistic.

  18. I hate to say it but... by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was extremely confident that Microsoft could pull a rabbit out of the hat and that the 360 would offer, at the very least, workable compatibility for their "A" list of games. As anyone can tell you, most of the "compatible" games are barely so and some listed as compatible just aren't. There are a handful of games that are playable, notably Halo 2, but the level of compatibility for some games, such as Ninja Gaiden, is so bad that they're basically unplayable. In time Microsoft will probably get the compatibility up, but there are going to be some games that will never be compatible regardless of Microsoft's commitment to do so.

    I hate to say it, but if you're going to buy a 360 based in part on the ability to play existing Xbox games as I was, hold off, because it just ain't there yet. Those without an Xbox and waiting for the 360 to come down in price should really check out the existing Xbox, which currently sells for as little as $177 Canadian with two games.

    1. Re:I hate to say it but... by Slashcrap · · Score: 1

      As anyone can tell you, most of the "compatible" games are barely so and some listed as compatible just aren't.

      Ah, we have the answer at last! MS are clearly using Cedega for the compatibility layer.

  19. Don't mod ME down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya jerks!

  20. Glad I'm a Playstation Fan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew the 360 had issues but software patches for a console?!?!? To play popular XBox games?!?!?! Sony are you listening? Please don't follow in M$'s footsteps. Build the PSThree right the first time around.

  21. Well my fucking XBox died recently by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    I was tempted to buy an XBox 360 but it doesnt seem to be compatible with the (few) games I have so don't think I'll bother at this time.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  22. Microsoft's 360 == Python's Black Night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 360 is like the Black Night of consoles.

    The shitty graphics.
    The tiny disc space.
    The hardware defects.
    The software crashes.
    The botched service packs.
    The poor library of games.
    The ripoff online system.

    And the BC fiasco...I don't think the 360 has any limbs left.

  23. Oh brother by DrMrLordX · · Score: 1

    What does this say about the 360 when its backwards compatibility with old Xbox titles is major news? Shouldn't we be interested in 360 titles instead?

    1. Re:Oh brother by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Yes but outside of Oblivion there haven't been many newsworthy XC games lately.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  24. Awesome! Download the patch ... by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

    Sounds just like a PC.
    Trust Microsoft to nibble away at the basic nature of a product (trouble free entertainment) and turn it into something else.

    I don't think it's all bad mind, but it sounds like precisely the kind of hassle (especially, the fact this is the *second* patch for some games) that I *wouldn't* want from a console.

    --
    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
  25. Still no save game compatibility by robosmurf · · Score: 1

    The backwards compatibility of the 360 is still a complete joke as there is no way to move save games from the original xbox to the 360. This makes it pretty useless for any of the longer games.

    I hope the PS3 doesn't make the same mistake. I would assume it would work, but I've not yet seen anything that actually says that the PS3 will take memory cards from the PS2.

    1. Re:Still no save game compatibility by Sai+Enigma · · Score: 1

      Well, the PlayStation 2 accepted PlayStation One memory cards, so I'm hoping Sony's head never went up their ass at some point.

    2. Re:Still no save game compatibility by Manmademan · · Score: 1

      The Ps3 will not have the ability to use Ps1 or Ps2 memory cards. The bad news is that those of you with lengthy completed games (or games in progress) on ps1/ps2 will have to start from scratch unless you get a Dexdrive or something similar.

      The GOOD news is that Ps1/Ps2/Ps3 games will now all use the same card/hard drive for saves which is great since ps1 cards are going to be increasingly hard to come by, and swapping between 3 different formats to save my games would suck.

  26. The other reason compatibility isn't working is.. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    Well the other reason is Microsoft have this strange initiative to make all the games run in 720p that are backwards compatible

    ARGH, so some of these B/C games are going to look REALLY good because the Xbox really isn't that bad graphically, despite it's age.

    So Microsoft are kinda stuck, do they release something like jade empire which looks really quite nice at 4:3 480p so that it does 720p (pillarboxed, I would guess?) ?
    Cause it's going to look GOOD - so good infact hell I might just play that rather than whatever else they've released.

    I think it's nice of them, but stupid - for goodness sakes some of these B/C games have frame rate issues,... guess what fella's - you could solve some of that by just supporting 480p, like the Xbox 1 always did ,... then you're not wasting cpu / gpu cycles AND some of our games might work!
    Don't promise what you can't keep, it's just pissed a lot of us off.

  27. Not quite on topic, but... by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 1
    It's going to be damn hard to preserve gaming legacy if things keep heading in this direction.

    Nothing lasts forever. Even if your 360 is still working in ten years, I'd be willing to bet that you wouldn't be able to get online for multiplayer and patches because Microsoft wouldn't ne supporting it. If that happens, what are we left with? A bunch of buggy, not quite whole games that we'll never be able to play in their "entirety" again?

    Something tells me that the road we're heading down means that, someday, we could very well reach a point where playing any Xbox games after their initial release may be impossible, assuming that you want to avoid the mistakes caused by crappy programming.

    How does this relate to the story at hand? I see this as proof that Microsoft doesn't really give a rat's ass. Updates are slow to come and they aren't right the first time around. I know how difficult it is to get emulation right, but it seems like Microsoft's stopped caring already. Who cares about the original Xbox? It's in the past!

    I miss cartridges already.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
  28. Nearly Controversial Title by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

    Winning Eleven 9

    which just beat out the alternative title, "Winning Nine 11".

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?