Xbox Games Through 2007

[Damian]

From Cinescape.com

Microsoft has announced they will put out new games for the current Xbox console up through 2007.

They have "not committed to a release date for the new console, code-named 'Xenon,' the industry universally expects it sometime at the end of 2005."

The company told Reuters that, "Microsoft is fully committed to this (current) generation and gamers can expect an amazing pipeline of titles into 2007."

[Enzian]

I wonder if this is an omen for backwards-compatibility? I really hope so, so I can mod the piss out of my current XBox.

[MooglePorn]

As someone who has never bought a system right when it came out, this makes me happy. If the second XBOX does come out this Christmas it's very possible I won't buy it until the summer or later, so getting new content on my system will be nice.

At the same time though, anything coming out that has a better version on the second system won't be bought by me.

[Wirehed]

I was thinking this would mean the new system will NOT be backward compatiple.

Also, I thought they had pretty much confirmed the name of the new system will be X-box 360?

[umainebearman]

I would assume this means it Xbox 2 will not be backwards compatible.

I read an interview with one of the x box developers and he said that backwards compatibility isn't as important as consumers believe it is. BUUUULLSHIT it ain't. How many ps 2 owners had ps1s and tons of games and then there ps 1 went tits up on them? Well lets say the ps 2 wasn't bw compatible? How many pissed of gamers do you think there would have been? Or for that matter how many PS2 buyers would have waited for an x box?

MS is just trying to get more people to buy xbox 2s but I have a feeling it's gonna back fire on them with no bw compat.

[Damian]

It's not going to be backwards compatible. Microsoft doesn't want to have to include hardware to allow the system to play the older games. Even here at work when we had a visit from our regular Microsoft rep he said it wasn't going to be backwards compatible and he's not even on the Xbox team.

[littlebib]

Originally Posted by umainebearman

I would assume this means it Xbox 2 will not be backwards compatible.

I read an interview with one of the x box developers and he said that backwards compatibility isn't as important as consumers believe it is.

I think its a really important feature for the first few months of the system before there's a lot of games out. After there's enough games, I don't think its as important.

I hope it has it though, my xbox has been acting up a bit lately so if Xbox2 is compatible, then I'd be more likely to buy one so I wouldn't have to worry about my original one dying.

[Damian]

Originally Posted by littlebib

I hope it has it though, my xbox has been acting up a bit lately so if Xbox2 is compatible, then I'd be more likely to buy one so I wouldn't have to worry about my original one dying.

Again, Microsoft told ME when I was in a meeting with them during one of their quarterly visits the Xbox 2 will NOT be backwards compatible. I think they've stated it enough in interviews on various web sites that fans of the original Xbox should stop wondering.

[MooglePorn]

I didn't know they stated officially that it wouldn't be. Bummer.

I only care because I'd like to save shelf space, really. Have both the XBOX and the XBOX2 hooked up will be a pain in the ass, and I probably won't want to give up the games on XBOX for a couple years at least.

[Damian]

Originally Posted by MooglePorn

I didn't know they stated officially that it wouldn't be. Bummer.

I only care because I'd like to save shelf space, really. Have both the XBOX and the XBOX2 hooked up will be a pain in the ass, and I probably won't want to give up the games on XBOX for a couple years at least.

They haven't stated anything in detail about the Xbox 2 yet so it won't come until at least they do their product announcment next month.
We get quarterly visits from Microsoft because I work for a computer manufacturer. While we were sitting around waiting on people to get to the meeting we started talking about the Xbox 2. Our company rep, who is a software division rep, not their gaming division, said the system will not be backwards compatible. He gave some B.S. reason along the lines of cost, or size, or complexity or some thing along those lines.
Is it possible he was just bullshitting us? Absolutly...but I don't see why he would.

[Ruined]

From what I've read, what it boils down to is MS originally designed the system to not be backwards compatible, to save cost. However, due to the extremely bad PR and anti-hype it has been creating around XBOX2, MS has been trying for the past year or so to implement it.

I think its really still up in the air whether they will get a solution out on time, but I am leaning towards the thought of it not being backwards compatible.

If it is backwards compatible, you will definitely need to buy the hard drive addon to get xbox games to work.

IMO it was an incredibly bad move by MS to go IBM/ATI. They should have done AMD/Nvidia or Intel/Nvidia. No backwards compatiblity is going to kill the system, or at least ensure PS3 wins the war.

[Enzian]

Well, Ruined, I think it's a little early in the game to resign in defeat. It's a manufacturer - it's not even a spec. While it's definitely a thorn in the side of MS, creating another adaption layer atop an already-thick palimpset of layers shouldn't be impossible.

And I agree with the MS insider - backwards compatibility is a bullet on the pro/con sheet, but otherwise unimportant. How many people who bought a PS2 played their PS1 games for any length of time? Shit, if all they wanted to do was play their old games, why did they buy a PS2 in the first place? Like I said, it's a pro on the pro/con tally, but by and large, it's useless.

The reason I say that this seems to be a sign of backwards compatibility is that MS is planning on supporting the XB1 even while the XB2 is out on the market. Business savvy would say to drop the old tech and push the new hard, not attempt a half-assed both. UNLESS, of course, the new software for the XB2 will run on the XB1! In that case, it's just a matter of killing two birds with one stone.

So, why do you guys think this means XB2/1 incompatibility? What's the rationale?

[SilentBob]

I believe Microsoft made an announcement on IGN that they would be backwards compatible for the next gen system. (but can't find anything)




If not click here to see what is being said to be a pic of Project Gotham Racing 3 in real time.


Oh here's a comparison pic to the real car

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Enzian

Well, Ruined, I think it's a little early in the game to resign in defeat. It's a manufacturer - it's not even a spec. While it's definitely a thorn in the side of MS, creating another adaption layer atop an already-thick palimpset of layers shouldn't be impossible.

It's more than just a manufacturer, it's a CPU with a totally different architecture than the original XBOX and a GPU that doesn't support in hardware several of the functions of the original XBOX due to Nvidia's patents. My friend who is a computer engineer says it is possible but extremely difficult to do, and isn't expecting XBOX2 to have BC - or if it does, to be somewhat flakey and/or limited.

And I agree with the MS insider - backwards compatibility is a bullet on the pro/con sheet, but otherwise unimportant. How many people who bought a PS2 played their PS1 games for any length of time? Shit, if all they wanted to do was play their old games, why did they buy a PS2 in the first place? Like I said, it's a pro on the pro/con tally, but by and large, it's useless.

I don't agree with this, a large portion of the videogame market are adults now (especially XBOX's target audience), adults who want to protect their investment and don't want clutter in their living room. They probably don't want to buy a second or third console to put under the family TV, but likewise they also don't want to render the library of games they invested quite some money in useless. When it was just kids in the videogame market, backwards compatiblity was not important as it is today, because kids don't mind throwing away their old toys, and don't see them as something that they put money into... And having an uncluttered room probably isn't at the top of most kids' priority lists

The reason I say that this seems to be a sign of backwards compatibility is that MS is planning on supporting the XB1 even while the XB2 is out on the market. Business savvy would say to drop the old tech and push the new hard, not attempt a half-assed both. UNLESS, of course, the new software for the XB2 will run on the XB1! In that case, it's just a matter of killing two birds with one stone.

So, why do you guys think this means XB2/1 incompatibility? What's the rationale?

I don't think the statement means anything in terms of backwards compatibility, really. These types of statements are usually made before the upcoming release of a console to ensure that sales of hardware & software for the current generation do not dip in between the time that the new hardware is announced and imminent, and the time the new hardware & software is actually released. These announcements are made to delay the killing off of sales of the current gen for as long as possible. While Microsoft builds hype for XBOX2, they also build the question in the XBOX1 owner's or potential owner's mind: should I buy this game for $50 when XBOX2 will be out in six months? Should I buy this XBOX console when the XBOX2 will be out in six months?

However, for BC, you could make your argument... Those arguing the opposite would likely say that MS is announcing this to placate current XBOX owners by letting them know their investment in XBOX1 isn't going anywhere until 2007 at least.

Whether it will still actually have it is truly up in the air. If you remember the launch of XBOX1, during the E3 just prior to its launch, Microsoft's playable XBOX consoles on the floor did not have the UMA motherboard implemented, they were basically like PCs with the XBOX hardware in them. Because of this, Halo ran at like half the framerate that it did when it was released to consumers just months later; people came back from E3 saying Halo and XBOX ran like crap, yet just a few months later when the actual console was released everything ran beautifully. Like XBOX1, I expect XBOX2's development to come down to the line also.

[Damian]

Originally Posted by Ruined

IMO it was an incredibly bad move by MS to go IBM/ATI. They should have done AMD/Nvidia or Intel/Nvidia

Why is it a bad move to go with a PowerPC chip and Radeon for graphics?

. No backwards compatiblity is going to kill the system, or at least ensure PS3 wins the war.

You can't say that. I seriously DOUBT ANY Xbox fans would refuse to but the Xbox 2 simply because it doesn't play their Xbox one games. That would be ridiculous. They will still have their Xbox 1 systems to play them on and most will not purchase an Xbox game if it's available for the Xbox 2 as well.

I don't agree with this, a large portion of the videogame market are adults now (especially XBOX's target audience), adults who want to protect their investment and don't want clutter in their living room. They probably don't want to buy a second or third console to put under the family TV, but likewise they also don't want to render the library of games they invested quite some money in useless. When it was just kids in the videogame market, backwards compatiblity was not important as it is today, because kids don't mind throwing away their old toys, and don't see them as something that they put money into... And having an uncluttered room probably isn't at the top of most kids' priority lists

From where you sit you may THINK a large portion of gamers are adults, but they are still not the target market otherwise we'd be seeing more game related marketing material appearing in adult magazines and TV channels. The tarket market is and always will be the 13 to 25 year old. A demographic like you pointed out does not care that much about clutter.
As an adult I can care less if it's backwards compatible because my Xbox still works fine.
I agree I don't want clutter so what do I do? I put all my unused consoles into my stereo cabinet.
There...out of site.
So kids don't care about clutter, adults do but adults can figure out there are places to put unused consoles so your argument doesn't really work.

[littlebib]

Originally Posted by Damian

You can't say that. I seriously DOUBT ANY Xbox fans would refuse to but the Xbox 2 simply because it doesn't play their Xbox one games. That would be ridiculous. They will still have their Xbox 1 systems to play them on and most will not purchase an Xbox game if it's available for the Xbox 2 as well.

I would agree with that. But, you would likely get people to buy an Xbox2 earlier with backwards compatibility.

I think the bigger factor on whether or not MS can gain ground on PS3 is the fact that they're coming out earlier. If MS can beat Sony by 6-12 months that's a lot of people who will end up buying the Xbox2.

I'm very curious to see what each company is going to be announcing at E3. Sony was going to beat Microsoft to the punch because their presentation is 3 hours earlier than MS, so MS comes back with the MTV announcement. The biggest difference that I can see so far is the MS will be showing the hardware, whereas the PS3 will just be an annoucement (i.e. vaporware). So, will Sony be able to stop people from buying the Xbox2 based on hype only?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Damian

Why is it a bad move to go with a PowerPC chip and Radeon for graphics?

The PowerPC is hugely different in architecture than the x86 chip used in XBOX1. Different enough that emulation will be a beast. Going for one of the dual-core Intel or AMD chips would have been a smarter move. Similar performance while still maintaining compatibility.

As for Radeon, again XBOX1 also uses several patented Nvidia extensions. Nvidia also has more impressive products and technology currently (and look to have a year's head start on next-gen technology over ATI) and would have been backwards compatible with those extensions.

In the end, a large chunk of the money they saved by going with the lowest bidders - IBM/ATI - will be offset by the massive task of attempting to program backwards compatibility between XBOX1 and XBOX2 with its radically different hardware. And they still might not be able to make that happen. Seems like a blunder to me.

You can't say that. I seriously DOUBT ANY Xbox fans would refuse to but the Xbox 2 simply because it doesn't play their Xbox one games. That would be ridiculous. They will still have their Xbox 1 systems to play them on and most will not purchase an Xbox game if it's available for the Xbox 2 as well.

Personally I won't buy XBOX2 at least until after PS3 is out if XBOX2 is not backwards compatible. PS3 will have first priority. If MS doesn't get a big head start on Sony, they can kiss next-gen goodbye.

From where you sit you may THINK a large portion of gamers are adults, but they are still not the target market otherwise we'd be seeing more game related marketing material appearing in adult magazines and TV channels. The tarket market is and always will be the 13 to 25 year old. A demographic like you pointed out does not care that much about clutter.

XBOX Live & XBOX games all cater to adult or near-adult market. Many of the XBOX features require credit cards, including downloadable content, Live, etc. You also don't see many kid games on XBOX compared to say Gamecube. I'd say the range for XBOX is probably skewed towards adults (remember 18 = adult), compared to Gamecube which is probably skewed more towards kids (hence all the kids games).

As an adult I can care less if it's backwards compatible because my Xbox still works fine.

For now. What if it breaks a few years after XBOX2 is released (Which is likely with a disc-based system)? You really want to spend another $100 on an XBOX1? I'd prefer to just ditch my XBOX when XBOX2 comes out.

I agree I don't want clutter so what do I do? I put all my unused consoles into my stereo cabinet.
There...out of site.
So kids don't care about clutter, adults do but adults can figure out there are places to put unused consoles so your argument doesn't really work.

You are assuming you will no longer want to play XBOX1 games when XBOX2 comes out. I do, and I don't want to start a stereo rack filled with xbox1, xbox2, xbox3, etc consoles either

For the record, I'm also now holding off on buying multiplatform games for XBOX until they announce whether it has backwards compatibility. If it doesn't, PS2 versions will get my money.

[Damian]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The PowerPC is hugely different in architecture than the x86 chip used in XBOX1. Different enough that emulation will be a beast. Going for one of the dual-core Intel or AMD chips would have been a smarter move. Similar performance while still maintaining compatibility.

And how much do you think the Xbox 2 with a Dual Core CPU would cost? Damn dude that would be a pretty expensive game console.

As for Radeon, again XBOX1 also uses several patented Nvidia extensions. Nvidia also has more impressive products and technology currently (and look to have a year's head start on next-gen technology over ATI) and would have been backwards compatible with those extensions.

I think your product dedication is talking again here but I don't want to continue our ongoing ATI vs nVidia debate. It's getting old.

For now. What if it breaks a few years after XBOX2 is released (Which is likely with a disc-based system)? You really want to spend another $100 on an XBOX1? I'd prefer to just ditch my XBOX when XBOX2 comes out.

Most people don't play old games over and over again. I still have an Atari 2600 but i'm not playing those games anymore. There is a time when a game system, no matter how great it was, becomes obsolete and people loose interest in it other then maybe as just a novelty. I think console manufacturers understand this and don't expect their consumers to be playing the older systems for years and years. If they did they wouldn't develop new systems every four or five years.

Personally I won't buy XBOX2 at least until after PS3 is out if XBOX2 is not backwards compatible. PS3 will have first priority. If MS doesn't get a big head start on Sony, they can kiss next-gen goodbye.

Does this have anything to do with the fact that the PS3 announced they are using nVidia for their graphics? Again i'm not knocking your product dedication but you do tend to lean towards everything and anything that's nVidia based.

I do, and I don't want to start a stereo rack filled with xbox1, xbox2, xbox3, etc consoles either

Well then maybe you should stop playing console games. Hell even PC games as far as that goes. Technology gets old and gets replaced. You either have to deal with it and find another hobby. I would bet you have more then just an Xbox and a PS/2 right? If you think you're going to keep your consoles systems down to just one primary system for each manufacturer you're gravely mistaken. I don't recall a lot of people bitching that the Gamecube didn't play N64 games. Or what about when the N64 came out, it didn't play Super Nintendo games, why no complaints then? Just because Sony built PS/1 support into the PS/2 people suddenly think every new console that comes out absolutly MUST support all the previous game versions or they're not going to buy it. That's being kind of spoiled if you ask me all because of one console? How many people actually continued to purchase or even play PS/1 games on their PS/2? Those who had PS/1 systems may have played 'em for awhile until Sony built up their library. Then they stopped playing them in favor of the PS/2 versions.
Most gamers probably don't even keep a huge library of games anymore. They play a game, finish it and probably take it down and trade it for credit towards a new game. Some multiplayer games may be played over and over again but for the most part I would bet gamers are constantly refreshing their library. At fifty bucks a pop not everybody can afford to have hundreds of games in their library.

Phew...my fingers are tired now. :p

[debz]

actually I'd have to say that BC started with Nintendo NOT sony with the Gameboy

gameboy->gameboy colour->gameboy advance and sortof to the DS (only advanced games)

and with nintendos revolution and the PS3 both backwards compatable that is a good thing

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Damian

And how much do you think the Xbox 2 with a Dual Core CPU would cost? Damn dude that would be a pretty expensive game console.

Uh, damian, the ibm core slated for use in XBOX2 has three cores :p

I think your product dedication is talking again here but I don't want to continue our ongoing ATI vs nVidia debate. It's getting old.

That's fine, but Nvidia controls how their patented technologies are used.

Most people don't play old games over and over again. I still have an Atari 2600 but i'm not playing those games anymore. There is a time when a game system, no matter how great it was, becomes obsolete and people loose interest in it other then maybe as just a novelty. I think console manufacturers understand this and don't expect their consumers to be playing the older systems for years and years. If they did they wouldn't develop new systems every four or five years.

There are games on XBOX, like Beyond Good and Evil for instance, that I will play time and time again. There are a lot of XBOX games I haven't beaten and won't come close to beating by the time XBOX2 is out. And when my XBOX dies inevitably, I'd like to know the game library isn't dying with it. If I had 20 games, maybe not a big deal, but I have 120+.

Does this have anything to do with the fact that the PS3 announced they are using nVidia for their graphics? Again i'm not knocking your product dedication but you do tend to lean towards everything and anything that's nVidia based.

NV, aside from one or two product series, have been the most innovative graphics chip maker since 3dfx died. Looking at the current gen of products, I wouldn't be surprised if PS3 has better graphics than XBOX2. All that being said, putting NV into XBOX2 would have made backwards compatibility that much easier.

Well then maybe you should stop playing console games. Hell even PC games as far as that goes. Technology gets old and gets replaced. You either have to deal with it and find another hobby. I would bet you have more then just an Xbox and a PS/2 right?

Not currently, no. Most of the classic games are available on current consoles or on other formats. I use a maximum of two consoles at one time.

If you think you're going to keep your consoles systems down to just one primary system for each manufacturer you're gravely mistaken. I don't recall a lot of people bitching that the Gamecube didn't play N64 games. Or what about when the N64 came out, it didn't play Super Nintendo games, why no complaints then? Just because Sony built PS/1 support into the PS/2 people suddenly think every new console that comes out absolutly MUST support all the previous game versions or they're not going to buy it.

Exactly, Sony set a new higher standard in this aspect, continues to follow the standard with PS3, and other manufacturers should follow suit because it is possible with disc-based media if proper planning goes into subsequent consoles. If they don't, my money goes to Sony, and that's my choice.

That's being kind of spoiled if you ask me all because of one console? How many people actually continued to purchase or even play PS/1 games on their PS/2? Those who had PS/1 systems may have played 'em for awhile until Sony built up their library. Then they stopped playing them in favor of the PS/2 versions.

I never had a PS1, and when I bought my PS2, I also bought around 20-30 PS1 games. There are many games that are worth playing more than once even if the graphics are inferior. I still have tons of old LucasArts and Sierra games on my PC HD, for instance.

Most gamers probably don't even keep a huge library of games anymore. They play a game, finish it and probably take it down and trade it for credit towards a new game. Some multiplayer games may be played over and over again but for the most part I would bet gamers are constantly refreshing their library. At fifty bucks a pop not everybody can afford to have hundreds of games in their library.

Well I can and I do :p

[Damian]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Uh, damian, the ibm core slated for use in XBOX2 has three cores :p



That's fine, but Nvidia controls how their patented technologies are used.



There are games on XBOX, like Beyond Good and Evil for instance, that I will play time and time again. There are a lot of XBOX games I haven't beaten and won't come close to beating by the time XBOX2 is out. And when my XBOX dies inevitably, I'd like to know the game library isn't dying with it. If I had 20 games, maybe not a big deal, but I have 120+.



NV, aside from one or two product series, have been the most innovative graphics chip maker since 3dfx died. Looking at the current gen of products, I wouldn't be surprised if PS3 has better graphics than XBOX2. All that being said, putting NV into XBOX2 would have made backwards compatibility that much easier.



Not currently, no. Most of the classic games are available on current consoles or on other formats. I use a maximum of two consoles at one time.



Exactly, Sony set a new higher standard in this aspect, continues to follow the standard with PS3, and other manufacturers should follow suit because it is possible with disc-based media if proper planning goes into subsequent consoles. If they don't, my money goes to Sony, and that's my choice.



I never had a PS1, and when I bought my PS2, I also bought around 20-30 PS1 games. There are many games that are worth playing more than once even if the graphics are inferior. I still have tons of old LucasArts and Sierra games on my PC HD, for instance.



Well I can and I do :p

SHIT!
I had great answers to each of these responses and as usual the software timed out on me and I lost the post.
I'm not reposting them again at least right now so I'll just add..neener...neener...neener.

[Jeff003]

I read somewhere on the internet that the new xbox will have variations.You can either buy one with a harddrive for backwards compatible or the one for the memory card.I would rather it be backwards compatible because I don't won't my current xbox games to become obsolete.E3 in May will probebly reveal whether or not the next xbox will be backward compatible.If it is I will invest in one eventually.I plan right now on buying a ps3 so I can play my ps2 games on it and for Ace Combat 6 which will be coming out in 2007.Right now I have both the ps2 and xbox because each offers exclusive games that the other don't.