Backward compatability is 'backwards' strategy, says Microsoft - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Axznma;40746882]The goal is to slowly phase out older game systems so you are forced to purchase and buy the next generation to continue playing games. It's why certain major publishers shut down older games server structures and companies with multiple MMO's will shut down older ones. It's not about "saving costs" and other graphs with illusioned data they wave in front of you; it's so they can keep you from being 'content' with your older purchases, and in doing so they have an easier time convincing you to buy their new products. It's a greedy, soulless market strategy that is painfully transparent. Vehicle manufactures do this all the time when they stop supporting old vehicles, though in a far slower fashion so most people fail to notice or care.[/QUOTE] or maybe their hardware is too different to do hardware emulation and their software emulation takes way too much power but no, clearly their plan is to phase out the older generation by [I]making you keep them to play your old games [/I] [QUOTE=Mr. Tripp;40746657]Why did so many people buy the 3DS just to play DS games with a circle pad? Why did so many people buy the Vita to play PSP games with a second stick? Why did so many people buy the Game Boy Colour to play select Game Boy games in Colour? Why did so many people buy the Game Boy Advance to play Game Boy, Game Boy Colour, NES and SNES games?[/QUOTE] seriously, why did they? you'd think that they would have bought the consoles the games were made for if that's what they really wanted

[QUOTE=Juniez;40747001] seriously, why did they? you'd think that they would have bought the consoles the games were made for if that's what they really wanted[/QUOTE] If I have the choice of hunting for an older version of a console that isn't in production anymore or I can buy a newer console that has backwards compatibility you bet your ass i'm going with the one with backwards compatibility. I don't want to have to find an old used PS1 just to play PS1 games. I'll buy a PS2 that is backwards compatible to play my PS1 game or i'll buy the PS3 version on the marketplace.

They're right. Backwards compatibility is straight up not possible given the new system architecture they are using, and it would be incredibly foolish to add hardware to support feature very few people use (given that it would add to the cost of the system). I would like to remind everyone that the PS4 doesn't have backwards compatibility either, only the ability to stream games using an onlive-like service. It's a nice feature for Sony to add, and probably the smartest way to do it, but it's hardly ideal.

I actually spent more time playing GameCube games than Wii games on my console, but then I am getting old and couldn't use the wiimote motion controls for too long without getting wrist cramps

[QUOTE=legolover122;40747271]If I have the choice of hunting for an older version of a console that isn't in production anymore or I can buy a newer console that has backwards compatibility you bet your ass i'm going with the one with backwards compatibility. I don't want to have to find an old used PS1 just to play PS1 games. I'll buy a PS2 that is backwards compatible to play my PS1 game or i'll buy the PS3 version on the marketplace.[/QUOTE] well, here's your warning - buy an xbox360 while you can before they go out of production or whatever ... if you were ever interested in it, that is. Chances are after eight years you would have had plenty of time to make up your mind

12% would be bummed eh? the rest probably don't care because [I]they won't buy it[/I]

[QUOTE=Juniez;40747318]well, here's your warning - buy an xbox360 while you can before they go out of production or whatever ... if you were ever interested in it, that is. Chances are after eight years you would have had plenty of time to make up your mind[/QUOTE] I already have one. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying no backwards compatibility is a system killer, especially with PS3s retardedass CPU, short of having the processor in the PS4 it wouldn't work, and i'm sure the 360 has it's oddities as well. I'm saying it's a good feature to have though.

[QUOTE=Yummy Pie;40743741]Neither console is out and the PS4 already won.[/QUOTE] how, since it's not BWC either. Honestly that idea does make sense, since with a console generation change, we often see a gamer generation change as well. So that the older games really are not that sought after.

I think the way they've justified it is utter shit, but I can see it from the other side. Emulation of older games from older hardware is no simple task, it involves extra dedicated hardware and a lot of software tinkering to make it possible, and isn't a guaranteed solution. I think back to the early console days and how no one ever complained about 'backwards compatibility' (huh? what's that? is that a new game?). In fact, people seemed to revel in whipping out that old console from yesteryear and firing it up to play some classic games - people still love getting out the old N64 or Sega Saturn, you know? I think Microsoft has been hurting on the 360 front for some time, running lots of losses, dropping stock etc etc, and this is just one more cost-cutting method that both makes their new console easier to mass produce effectively and gives them a little more financial security, but at the same time they just haven't thought through the changing marketplace. People DO want backwards compatibility these days, and that's something they haven't quite grasped effectively yet. I suppose I'm not making much of a point here... I think there's arguments for both sides of the topic, but at the end of the day the real winner is that backwards compatibility SHOULD be included, it's the way of the future. Maybe they're just worried about that cutting into back catalogue sales or something? I don't know.

[QUOTE=legolover122;40747360]I already have one. Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying no backwards compatibility is a system killer, especially with PS3s retardedass CPU, short of having the processor in the PS4 it wouldn't work, and i'm sure the 360 has it's oddities as well. I'm saying it's a good feature to have though.[/QUOTE] well yeah, that's exactly what it is - a bonus. i'm just saying that no-one should be surprised that the next generation of consoles won't have backwards compatibility, since it's honestly "too costly and time-intensive to be worth it"

Honestly, I don't think backward compatibility is a very big deal, yeah it's a nice feature, but really nonessential, if the console's decent then lacking backwards compatibility isn't any type of deal-breaker. A console should be able to stand on its own legs, if you really want to play the older games that badly then you're better off just sticking to the older console. That being said: it's not a bad feature so deliberately removing it in a console that's already extremely lacking is a dumb move.

[QUOTE=Yummy Pie;40743741]Neither console is out and the PS4 already won.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=MendozaMan;40744275]Idiots. PS4 it is.[/QUOTE] But the PS4 doesn't have native backwards compatibility either, unless I missed something...

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;40747401]That being said: it's not a bad feature so deliberately removing it in a console that's already extremely lacking is a dumb move. But then again so is nearly everything else about the Xbox One.[/QUOTE] haha yeah that would be pretty stupid if it were true

[QUOTE=Juniez;40747001]but no, clearly their plan is to phase out the older generation by [I]making you keep them to play your old games [/I][/QUOTE] Until the consoles wear out and no longer function, which is the point: [QUOTE]The goal is to slowly phase out older game systems so you are forced to purchase and buy the next generation to continue playing games.[/QUOTE] A tried and true method that has been in every major market for the last hundred years. It's a basic market strategy. That the video game medium doesn't practice common use of the 'life-time guarantee' just makes it all the easier. They don't even really need to try since the technology is fated to wear out and on the whole have very short life-spans compared to other major products -- life time guarantees would be far too beneficial to the video game customer since they would actually get active use from it. The video game industry hasn't become the next big "thing" simply because a lot of people buy games, the deeper financial aspects of it are very rewarding and easy to achieve in comparison to other major markets -- least of all due to the target audience ignoring the standards set in place in all other major markets, which the video game industry seems set on ignoring. It will work so long as the average customer doesn't understand; as soon as they do you will see video games fade from the spotlight as newer enterprises emerge, much like the current video game industry did in the 90s. You're already seeing the industries first steps toward that end with the backlash against sub-par practices and products. 5 years ago the general population didn't care about many of the issues we have today; nowadays they're beginning to understand how other markets work and thus how the video game market is shafting them. I've said it many times: The video game industry is extremely young, and like many young kids thinks it is above and better than the elders. It sees the long-set standards that other markets [I]have[/I] to abide by (or thus lose their market and collapse) and decides it is above such practices. Just like those elders, the video game industry will learn the hard way and will change as it grows older, the first step to that change is people no longer accepting being tossed around and shafted out of a good service/product. The data industry itself will go through this change. More and more you see the concepts of "ownership" over this data coming up through legal outlets. On the whole the data industry thinks itself above the set-standard of "If I buy it, I can sell it or give it away to a friend however I want because I own it now". Both the data and video game industry will learn to play by the rules that [I]every other industry has to[/I] or, eventually, collapse when people simply decide "I'm not paying for this anymore".

I find it hilarious that you so many of you are saying ps4 wins even though that's not backwards compatible either.

[QUOTE=Axznma;40747423]Until the consoles wear out and no longer function, which is the point: A tried and true method that has been in every major market for the last hundred years. It's a basic market strategy. That the video game medium doesn't practice common use of the 'life-time guarantee' just makes it all the easier. They don't even really need to try since the technology is fated to wear out and on the whole have very short life-spans compared to other major products -- life time guarantees would be far too beneficial to the video game customer since they would actually get active use from it. The video game industry hasn't become the next big "thing" simply because a lot of people buy games, the deeper financial aspects of it are very rewarding and easy to achieve in comparison to other major markets -- least of all due to the target audience ignoring the standards set in place in all other major markets, which the video game industry seems set on ignoring. It will work so long as the average customer doesn't understand; as soon as they do you will see video games fade from the spotlight as newer enterprises emerge, much like the current video game industry did in the 90s. You're already seeing the industries first steps toward that end with the backlash against sub-par practices and products. 5 years ago the general population didn't care about many of the issues we have today; nowadays they're beginning to understand how other markets work and thus how the video game market is shafting them. I've said it many times: The video game industry is extremely young, and like many young kids thinks it is above and better than the elders. It sees the long-set standards that other markets [I]have[/I] to abide by (or thus lose their market and collapse) and decides it is above such practices. Just like those elders, the video game industry will learn the hard way and will change as it grows older, the first step to that change is people no longer accepting being tossed around and shafted out of a good service/product. The data industry itself will go through this change. More and more you see the concepts of "ownership" over this data coming up through legal outlets. On the whole the data industry thinks itself above the set-standard of "If I buy it, I can sell it or give it away to a friend however I want because I own it now". Both the data and video game industry will learn to play by the rules that [I]every other industry has to[/I] or, eventually, collapse when people simply decide "I'm not paying for this anymore".[/QUOTE] yeah but then you'd be assuming that people are 'forced' to change, when they're not. they [I]want [/I]to change because the next generation brings about improvements. it's not above the market practices as much as it is an faster form of it - things become outdated and obsolete much, much faster than in any other industry it's not some conspiracy to force people to spend money, its people wanting to take part in an industry that's constantly becoming more and more sophisticated. also because no-one wants to support old things when there are newer replacements that have shown clear improvements

[QUOTE=Pepsi-cola;40744172]I agree people would be complaining if it was backwards compatible at the expense of performance.[/QUOTE] Or at the expense of their wallets, like the PS3. There's a reason the launch models cost your family and a orphan child to purchase, it had two consoles worth of shit smashed into that hulking great case. Backwards compatibility in consoles isn't exactly a standard fare thing, we've only offered it where we can through emulation, and the PS3/ 360 aren't exactly easy to emulate. Even the PS2/ Xbox are fucking assholes to emulate (yeah PCSX2 works, but it isn't great still).

This is funny coming from the company whose flagship product still contains code from nearly 20 years ago to maintain backwards compatibility with software.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;40747577]This is funny coming from the company whose flagship product still contains code from nearly 20 years ago to maintain backwards compatibility with software.[/QUOTE] it gets funnier when it's coming from the company whose latest operating system is starting to align with their new mindset also it'd be great if they would finally stop supporting 32 bit

[QUOTE=Forumaster;40747577]This is funny coming from the company whose flagship product still contains code from nearly 20 years ago to maintain backwards compatibility with software.[/QUOTE] backwards compatibility with x360 would require shipping with the old powerpc hardware. Nobody wants to pay for that shit. Code is free, hardware is not.

Oh fuck you, backwards compatibility is backwards but all that unnecessary TV shit isn't? I want to pay for a console, not pay for a console AND a TiVo. [QUOTE=Van-man;40744057]As consoles are becoming more and more like PC's, except they're not gaining any of the benefits, why are consoles (in this case, the Xbox One) such a great idea again?[/QUOTE] They're becoming more like PC's in a bad way, unnecessary multimedia shit, games requiring installation to an HD instead of playing straight from the disk.

My fucking god, I cannot believe this huge anti Microsoft/Xbox circlejerk that's absolutely everywhere. Fuck. DAE hate MICRO$OFT??

[QUOTE=aydin690;40747508]I find it hilarious that you so many of you are saying ps4 wins even though that's not backwards compatible either.[/QUOTE] at least it's a game console and not a glorified tv box

[QUOTE=Diet Kane;40747954]at least it's a game console and not a glorified tv box[/QUOTE] How's xbox one not a game console? Just because it has some extra features, suddenly it's worse than ps4 and not a game console. Btw, i'm a pc gamer and the only consoles that i've ever owned been sega genesis and gba. I don't give a shit about these console but i'm just allergic to bullshit.

[QUOTE=Zatar963;40747919]My fucking god, I cannot believe this huge anti Microsoft/Xbox circlejerk that's absolutely everywhere. Fuck. DAE hate MICRO$OFT??[/QUOTE] There is no denying that conference was an absolute fuck fest. I honestly don't care for either console, but from my point of view Microsoft fell on their face... hard. [editline]22nd May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=aydin690;40748007]How's xbox one not a game console? Just because it has some extra features, suddenly it's worse than ps4 and not a game console. Btw, i'm a pc gamer and the only consoles that i've ever owned been sega genesis and gba. I don't give a shit about these console but i'm just allergic to bullshit.[/QUOTE] Didn't Microsoft announce they are stepping away from gaming and leaning into a home entertainment system?

[QUOTE=CommanderPT;40743839]Then it should be able to play older games like a pc, no? :v:[/QUOTE] ever tried playing age of empires 1-3 on windows 7? [editline]23rd May 2013[/editline] who fucking cares about backward compatibility

[QUOTE=aydin690;40747508]I find it hilarious that you so many of you are saying ps4 wins even though that's not backwards compatible either.[/QUOTE] PS4 wins because everything about [I]else[/I] on top of this about the Xbox One sucks, including no support for pre-owned games which also means that games will be registered to your console so you won't be able to share them amongst friends let-alone sell them later on, ridiculous amounts of focus on television and less focus on video games at conferences, and lots of focus on always-online to the point where several key features may not even be available unless you're playing online. Not to mention, people in this thread are saying "PS4 wins" because they don't want to support a developer that believes backwards compatibility is a counter-productive method of business. Backwards compatibility just plain makes customers happy, end of story. We all love it when we can play old games on our current gen consoles. One of the reasons why I loved the Wii is because I could play Gamecube games on it, so on and so forth. I find it hilarious how anyone can defend the console at this point. I understand the argument "Don't judge before it's out" but there's nothing to defend with the Xbox One right now. Everything we've seen about it is just shit and makes me wonder what is wrong with Microsoft.

now, don't get me wrong. if someone asked me if I wanted backwards compatibility in a new console, I'd probably say yes. [I]buuuuut...[/I] I don't quite understand why it's such a big thing to have. sure, it's neat to have but when people buy a new console, they don't usually buy it for the previous generation of games. if you want to play your old games, why not just keep the original console? it'll probably play them better than any hacked together emulation / frankenstein hardware combination will. [editline]22nd May 2013[/editline] I don't ever plan to sell my consoles without selling the entire library as well. it just seems like an incredibly foolish thing to do. (good) backwards compatibility was never standard in anything but handheld consoles anyways, why is everyone suddenly expecting it?

[QUOTE=Forumaster;40747577]This is funny coming from the company whose flagship product still contains code from nearly 20 years ago to maintain backwards compatibility with software.[/QUOTE] personal computer with literal infinite customization = / = uniform set of hardware with identical software that cannot be modified in any way, shape, or form. [editline]22nd May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Electrocuter;40747767]Oh fuck you, backwards compatibility is backwards but all that unnecessary TV shit isn't? I want to pay for a console, not pay for a console AND a TiVo. They're becoming more like PC's in a bad way, unnecessary multimedia shit, [b]games requiring installation to an HD instead of playing straight from the disk.[/b][/QUOTE] of all the things to complain about games take up like, 2-5 or so gigs of space on the PS3 when you install them. if you have a harddrive that's like 200 gigs, that's a fuckton of games. there's no way that you'd be able to fill up all of that shit quickly unless you were rich as fuck and bought every xb1 game for an entire year. plus, who the fuck plays like 20 games at once? oh also they run better if installed to the hdd.

[QUOTE=adadadsd;40744101]Trying to play older games on the new xbox would be like emulating older console games on the pc and that's why I'm assuming both consoles are going against it.[/QUOTE] Except Sony has a service [b]explicitly[/b] for emulation of past games.