Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Dismisses Xbox Backwards Compatibility
kukyfrope writes "In a recent interview on U.K. site Kikizo Peter Moore, Microsoft's head of the Interactive Entertainment business, claims that Microsoft has 'under promised and over delivered' Xbox game compatibility on the Xbox 360. He states that gamers are now looking more towards next-gen titles, forgetting about the majority of Xbox titles." From the article: "Moore's comments shouldn't be misunderstood. MS will be adding to its backwards compatibility list, but it hardly seems like a priority now that the 360 is hitting its stride and the original Xbox is getting less and less support."
SNES: Huge Success
Sega MegaDrive/Genesis: Huge Success
NES: Huge Success
I applaud microsoft for having backwards-compatibility on the X360. Sure, it's not perfect compatibility, but it does allow me to play some of my old XBox games on my X360, making for a nice transition as I acquire more X360 titles.
Certainly, it could be more compatible, but you do have to give them credit for what they have done. Sony was able to do this better as they did not change the underlying architecture (PS1 - MIPS R3000, PS2 - MIPS R5900), whereas Microsoft has (XBox - x86 P3, X360 - PPC Cell).
I can say from experience that writing programs for PPC is a whole new ball game when you're used to x86, and I can only imagine emulating x86 code on PPC being somewhere along the lines of a total nightmare.
Certainly, I do have some disappointment that it isn't 100% backwards compatible, but at least they didn't pull a Nintendo by offering absolutely no backwards compatibility.
Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
He states that gamers are now looking more towards next-gen titles, forgetting about the majority of Xbox titles.
Try telling that to my friends who own Xbox360s and complain that they have to keep their Xbox around to play a couple games they really like. Maybe they aren't the majority, but I know a few. I don't mean to come off sounding fanboy-ish, but that's one thing I think Sony did well. I only need to have my PS2 hooked up to play all of my PS1 and PS2 games.
Slackware
That's some nerve to quote this from the article:
...
Moore's comments shouldn't be misunderstood. MS will be adding to its backwards compatibility list
and still call the article
Microsoft Dismisses Xbox Compatibility
360 - Said it would play every XBox game, doesn't. We'll see.
They were pretty upfront about not being able to play every game.
Look, sorry, I love my 360, think MS are probably actually now heading to win this round of the console wars and all that stuff...
But...
This article is bullshit.
Seriously, the backwards compatibility on the 360 was disappointing at launch, but we were promised it would improve. Since then, it has barely improved and many of the old A-list X-Box titles are still missing from the compatibility list. Hell, there are still major releases coming out for the X-Box which aren't compatible with the 360. Given we're now 6 months after launch, this is taking on the tone of a bad joke. The very few updates to the compatibility list that have appeared have been extremely short and have mostly been for C-list titles.
Burnout 3 (which I much prefer to Revenge), MechAssault 2, Chronicles of Riddick, Panzer Dragoon Orta and Star Wars Republic Commando aren't "forgotten" titles. They're titles which, as recently as 12 months ago in some cases, were being promoted as major, front-line titles. They're games I still get the urge to play on a regular basis. Hell, they're good. Many of these are among the later wave of X-Box titles which did so much to reclaim its credibility as a platform for games other than Halo. To still have these unplayable on the 360 is a farce.
Most people don't go to the store and randomly buy a game. They have a goal in mind, like, "I want to pick up PGR3." Depending on the game they're looking for, it may not be available on other platforms. If I'm going to the store to buy a copy of PGR3 ($40-50), I'm not going to decide to pick up a copy of Burnout 3 and NFS:U2 ($20 each) instead. Games aren't as elastic as other products. If I go to a restaurant and order a Coke, you can give me a Pepsi or any other non-Coke cola product and I won't much care. If I go to the game store and ask for a copy of Halo, I will very much care if you hand me a copy of Killzone instead.
First, the Xbox 360 is $400, not $600 (that's the PS3 you're thinking about), assuming you're quoting in USD. Second, I think Moore is mostly correct about backwards compatibility. The goal is to provide value for your customers during the first few months of a console's life when there are not a bunch of games out yet (and those that are out are launch titles, which generally means "not all that great"). Sony does this with backwards compatibility. Nintendo has historically done it by keeping their launch prices low and expecting you to keep the previous generation console hooked up. Microsoft did it with the 360 by providing extra functionality like demos on Marketplace, Xbox Live Arcade, and Media Center Extender functionality. Backwards compatibility with Xbox games was tacked on because Sony's made it a mandatory bullet point.
Seriously, how many PS1 games did you buy or play on your PS2 in the last three years? I think I played one (FFIX) and purchased none. And the only reason I played it on my PS2 was because it was already connected. I certainly could've dug out my PSOne and hooked it up.
That depends on the user. I know a lot of people who bought a 360 solely for Geometry Wars (they've since branched out, but that was their killer app). Yes, a $5 game sold them on a $400 console. Personally, PGR3 and Geometry Wars was enough to get me to buy. Oblivion and Fight Night Round 3 were worth purchasing, but I'm really looking forward to Forza 2 at the end of this year. If you're a Halo fanboy, you probably won't buy a 360 until late next year.