Dear Microsoft, thanks for nothing.

Murph · Post by **Murph** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:02 pm

We've been informed today that there are going to be no more Backward Compatibility updates released for the Xbox 360 until March at the earliest. Microsoft's David Reid has stated that the team who do the BC work are on holiday throughout January and will start work on priority titles when they return. But from what it sounds like, there will be only a few more updates released through 2006.

This will come as a disappointment to many new Xbox 360 users, not only because the lack of new 360 titles but also any new plain Xbox titles they may like the look of (Black for example) will not work on their shiny new 360. It is no wonder less Xbox games are being sold now.

http://www.activexbox.com/xbox/comments ... 09&Group=1

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:32 pm

Yeah...this was discussed already in the MVP thread. Not like it's something we couldn't have guessed was going to happen.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:32 pm

http://www.digitalsportspage.com/module ... 500#144500

No big surprise here if you understand how dramatically different the GPU's for the new systems are compared to the older systems. It would be an incredible amount of work to ensure BC for every former XBox title....

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:40 pm

I guess that defies all logic on Sony's and Nintendos end. I guess they have patented that magic fairy dust that makes BC so so easy to do. The PSX was a totally different GPU then the PS2, yet somehow they were able to get the majority of the games BC out of the box. The Cell sure seems like it will be a totally different GPU the what is in the PS2, yet they plan on getting the majority of games BC out the box. The Revolution will be a totally different GPU the all the previous consoles, yet they plan on offering emulated games from the NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:47 pm

bdoughty wrote:I guess that defies all logic on Sony's and Nintendos end. I guess they have patented that magic fairy dust that makes BC so so easy to do. The PSX was a totally different GPU then the PS2, yet somehow they were able to get the majority of the games BC out of the box. The Cell sure seems like it will be a totally different GPU the what is in the PS2, yet they plan on getting the majority of games BC out the box. The Revolution will be a totally different GPU the all the previous consoles, yet they plan on offering emulated games from the NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube.

Way to make youself look silly. The PS2 console has the PS1 chip inside it - that's why almost every PS1 game works on the PS2. MS couldn't put an Xbox chip in the 360 without having to pay a fee to Nvidia for every 360 sold. And MS simply weren't prepared to lose even more money on every 360 sold just to ensure 99% backwards compatibility. MS made a mistake with the first Xbox of not having control of the silicon, a mistake they made sure they didn't repeat with the 360.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:53 pm

Feanor wrote: Way to make youself look silly. The PS2 console has the PS1 chip inside it - that's why almost every PS1 game works on the PS2. MS couldn't put an Xbox chip in the 360 without having to pay a fee to Nvidia for every 360 sold. And MS simply weren't prepared to lose even more money on every 360 sold just to ensure 99% backwards compatibility. MS made a mistake with the first Xbox of not having control of the silicon, a mistake they made sure they didn't repeat with the 360.

I don't feel silly since I never made any promises about BC. That would be the guys MS who tapped danced around the subject to where the consumer had no idea what they would be doing. Even after launch that paying consumer is still wondering what is happeneing in that regard. Meanwhile the BC guys at Microsoft are on a month long vacation. That only thing you can throw out is they were no willing to pay a little extra to make their console fully BC. You also fail to mention that through the current form of emulation on Xbox titles they might have to pay royalties to non-MS game developers for each game that is made BC. Sometimes there is more then meets the eye.

Now who looks silly?

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:58 pm

Homer: Wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute. Lisa honey, are you saying you're "never" going to eat any animal again? What about bacon?

Lisa: No.

Homer: Ham?

Lisa: No.

Homer: Pork chops?

Lisa: Dad! Those all come from the same animal!

Homer: Yeah, right Lisa. A wonderful, magical fairy dust that makes BC so so easy to do.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:02 pm

Matt Groening just called, he wants you to stop using his material.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:06 pm

"dear Microsoft: Thanks for nothing."

good grief. They didn't make the damn thing just so you could play your xbox1 games. Get over it. You got a new system, at launch, and this is what comes with it. Long waits for new titles.

I wouldn't waste my time working hard to keep the old, either. It's why I think it's nonsense to go after a system at launch, and why I'm perfectly happy with my little black box.

You can get another one for about 99 bucks...

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:12 pm

bdoughty wrote:I don't feel silly since I never made any promises about BC. That would be the guys MS who tapped danced around the subject to where the consumer had no idea what they would be doing. Even after launch that paying consumer is still wondering what is happeneing in that regard. Meanwhile the BC guys at Microsoft are on a month long vacation. That only thing you can throw out is they were no willing to pay a little extra to make their console fully BC. You also fail to mention that through the current form of emulation on Xbox titles they might have to pay royalties to non-MS game developers for each game that is made BC. Sometimes there is more then meets the eye.

Now who looks silly?

You do because you mentioned fairy dust when Sony just put a miniature version of the PS1 in the PS2, something that MS would have liked to have done but couldn't because they made their original Xbox out of other companies components. The MS guys never made any promises about BC apart from saying "the top-selling games will be BC". And a lot of them are.

If it was only "a little extra" MS would have paid it and saved themselves the cost and hassle of emulating old games. Since they didn't pay it, it was obviously a lot more than the "little extra" amount you pulled out of your ass.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:19 pm

First of all why don't we wait and make sure this is true, not saying it isn't. But the source of the information is not strong enough for me to believe they have given up..unless someone can't point elsewhere for confirmation.

Second, as far as Sony goes why don't we wait until the system is out and see what we actually get, unless of course you would like to believe Sony. Not like they haven't promised things in the past and not delivered.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:22 pm

bdoughty wrote:I guess that defies all logic on Sony's and Nintendos end. I guess they have patented that magic fairy dust that makes BC so so easy to do.

When and IF they are able to DELIVER BC, then we can have this discussion yet again. Going from the PS2 which has very little in common with the RSX chip of the PS3 will be a monumental undertaking. The only way ANY company can GUARANTEE BC is to include the previous graphics chipset to run previous generation games.

bdoughty wrote:The PSX was a totally different GPU then the PS2, yet somehow they were able to get the majority of the games BC out of the box.

While it may seem simplistic enough to you to compare BC from PS1 to PS2, both PS1 and PS2 graphics chips were Sony proprietary chips, not like PS3 which is coming from nVidia. Going from a gpu with 4 MB of VRAM and few if any DX9 features that the RSX is capable of will be an enormous engineering undertaking. Just because Sony is claiming they will do it does not translate into delivery of such capability.

bdoughty wrote:The Cell sure seems like it will be a totally different GPU the what is in the PS2, yet they plan on getting the majority of games BC out the box.

The "Cell" is not the GPU. It is the processor. RSX is the GPU. Planning on having the majority of game BC is a world away from DELIVERING BC. And they keep throwing out the word "majority" of games....that leaves them wiggle room in case they can't deliver what they promise TODAY.

bdoughty wrote:The Revolution will be a totally different GPU the all the previous consoles, yet they plan on offering emulated games from the NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube.

Good for Nintendo. Since the Revolution is being supplied by an ATI chipset, this should not be as difficult as 360/PS3 because the GC was an ATI chip as well and it is a well known fact that the Revolution will be nowhere near as big a technological leap that the 360/PS3 are.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:29 pm

Appreciate the correction Divot. You make valid points that I was incorrect about. You did not even feel the need to attack me, instead you attacked my words. Feanor should be taking notes.

Pittsburgh just score yet again to go up 24-3, plus I still have an Xbox to play Xbox games. All is well in the world.

Badgun · Post by **Badgun** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:41 pm

tealboy03 wrote:"dear Microsoft: Thanks for nothing."

good grief. They didn't make the damn thing just so you could play your xbox1 games. Get over it. You got a new system, at launch, and this is what comes with it. Long waits for new titles.

I wouldn't waste my time working hard to keep the old, either. It's why I think it's nonsense to go after a system at launch, and why I'm perfectly happy with my little black box.

You can get another one for about 99 bucks...

Exactly. The very reason why I kept one of my Xboxs. When I want to play PGR3, I'll pop it in my 360. When I want to play TOCA 2, I'll just pop it in my old Xbox.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:43 pm

I think it's not just a technical issue.

It may be that to emulate certain features in the nVidia GPU, they'd have to pay nVidia money, which they're probably trying to avoid.

So they could offer better BC but they'd have to pay nVidia, with whom they had a dispute about Xbox royalties.

reeche · Post by **reeche** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:49 pm

wco81 wrote:I think it's not just a technical issue.

It may be that to emulate certain features in the nVidia GPU, they'd have to pay nVidia money, which they're probably trying to avoid.

So they could offer better BC but they'd have to pay nVidia, with whom they had a dispute about Xbox royalties.

I actually agree with Bdoughty on this one. Microsoft should have just come clean and admitted what the actually process is and what the problem is then instead of just sort of making it up as they go along at least on the PR front. This is what makes the process feel disingenous. Perhaps they have and i just missed it but how they kept so bizzarely mum on the whole process until the very last second wasn't too cool in my book. Even the games that currently do emulate have problems and only a percentage (last time I checked it was about 28%) are actually Bc compatible. Not the biggest issue in the world when it is all said and done but I imagine both Sony and Nintendo will do a better job of this.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 7:33 pm

reeche wrote: I actually agree with Bdoughty on this one. Microsoft should have just come clean and admitted what the actually process is and what the problem is then instead of just sort of making it up as they go along at least on the PR front.

While I am not a programmer and I don't work for MS, my thinking is that they are going at this the best they can and I feel this is EXACTLY the reason they have been non-committal on this issue. Backwards compatibility emulating software created for dramatically different hardware is a monumental task.

reeche wrote:This is what makes the process feel disingenous. Perhaps they have and i just missed it but how they kept so bizzarely mum on the whole process until the very last second wasn't too cool in my book.

Their approach has not bothered me in the least. In fact, I find Sony's approach to be a bit difficult to swallow. They are making some pretty incredible claims. If they succeed, I will be first in line to congratulate them. If they don't, then they will deserve to be crucified for not delivering. MS on the other hand has been non-committal and I think it is the right approach for this particular issue.

reeche wrote:Even the games that currently do emulate have problems and only a percentage (last time I checked it was about 28%) are actually Bc compatible.

This is exactly why I feel that BC will be a thing of the past in this generation and beyond. The more complex the hardware environments get, the more difficult and time-consuming the job will be for such a feature. I don't know about anyone else here, but I did not purchase a 360 to be able to play XBox titles. That is why I still have 2 XBoxes...which I have not touched since I got my 360....

reeche wrote:Not the biggest issue in the world when it is all said and done but I imagine both Sony and Nintendo will do a better job of this.

I don't know why you feel this way. Nintendo, I can see because the graphics chip maker is the same as the GC, but not Sony. Guess we will see sometime in the future, won't we?

Sport73 · Post by **Sport73** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:34 pm

Other than not playing MVP, I don't really understand the fuss over BC. I have a beautiful XBox 360 sitting under my HDTV, and it has already provided me more gaming enjoyment than I got with the XBox in the last 6 months.

True, I miss MVP, but once a baseball game comes out for the 360 it will be a non-issue. Ultimately, this whole BC thing has a shelf-life of about 9 months MAXIMUM, before the gaming library on the 360 is strong enough to cover your needs without have to kick it old school.

PLUS, and most importantly, I gave my original XBox away pending the arrival of the 360, but it was still working perfectly. If I really wanted to be sure to play 'old' games or the Q1 releases, I would've kept it.

It's been said many times, but just 'cause there is a new machine doesn't mean your old one stops working.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:39 pm

Sport73 wrote:Other than not playing MVP, I don't really understand the fuss over BC.

1. NCAA Baseball
2. Arena Football
3. Moto GP
4. MX Superfly, or any MX title for that matter
5. Any wrestling title
6. Links
7. A football title where you can edit rosters & challenge calls
8. A game a kid under the age of 7 would play (No, COD2 is not for 5 year olds)
9. Star Wars Battlefront 1 & 2
10. Splashdown

I'm sure I'll come up with more, but you get the idea. The above reasons are also why I am not getting a 360 yet.

Sport73 · Post by **Sport73** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:46 pm

matthewk wrote:
Sport73 wrote:Other than not playing MVP, I don't really understand the fuss over BC.
1. NCAA Baseball
2. Arena Football
3. Moto GP
4. MX Superfly, or any MX title for that matter
5. Any wrestling title
6. Links
7. A football title where you can edit rosters & challenge calls
8. A game a kid under the age of 7 would play (No, COD2 is not for 5 year olds)
9. Star Wars Battlefront 1 & 2
10. Splashdown

I'm sure I'll come up with more, but you get the idea. The above reasons are also why I am not getting a 360 yet.

Exactly, if you want to play the games listed above, I highly recommend a system called the "XBox", it can be found for $100 or less and thus represents a terrific value.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:54 pm

matthewk wrote: 6. Links

How ironic that a Microsoft title is not BC.....disappointing, but understandable considering the dramatic changes to the GPU from XBox to the 360.

reeche · Post by **reeche** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 2:45 pm

Sport73 wrote:Exactly, if you want to play the games listed above, I highly recommend a system called the "XBox", it can be found for $100 or less and thus represents a terrific value.

Some of us don't want two stonehenged-sized consoles staked out in our living room.

Boom · Post by **Boom** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 3:02 pm

reeche wrote:
Sport73 wrote:Exactly, if you want to play the games listed above, I highly recommend a system called the "XBox", it can be found for $100 or less and thus represents a terrific value.
Some of us don't want two stonehenged-sized consoles staked out in our living room.

kevinpars · Post by **kevinpars** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 3:16 pm

I don't know why Microsoft didn't just stick the nVidia chip in the 360 and to hell with paying the royalties. Chances are, nVidia wouldn't even be able to find a 360 on a store shelf to check for the chip anyway. And if they did and popped that sucker open - guess what? They just pissed away their warranty!

Seriously, from what I read, the backward compatibility team had been working a lot of long hours getting done what the could do before the holidays. After being under the gun for so long they probably all had time off saved up that they took at Christmas and into January to spend time with their family and friends. Can't really blame them.

I can see both sides. I have played a lot of 360 games now and have got a lot out of the 360. Now I will have to wait a while for the next batch of games. And I am back using my xbox for MVP.

I am glad I kept my Xbox. Sure, it would have been great if all of these games were backward compatible, but I bought the 360 knowing that it was a crapshoot. And what I would get for my xbox and stuff I bought to use with it did not make it worth selling.

Besides, with Barbie™ Horse Adventures™ Wild Horse Rescue™ and Ty The Tasmanian Tiger™ already BC, who needs sports games??

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 3:33 pm

reeche wrote:
Sport73 wrote:Exactly, if you want to play the games listed above, I highly recommend a system called the "XBox", it can be found for $100 or less and thus represents a terrific value.
Some of us don't want two stonehenged-sized consoles staked out in our living room.

Seriously. I've devoted half of my entertainment center to the Xbox 360 as it is now. If I hook the Xbox back up then that means I have to remove the stereo!

Plus, isn't Microsoft trying to draw new customers? It seems to me that everyone buying an Xbox 360 had an Xbox. I really don't think they are getting anyone from the PS2-only crowd. A big selling point of convincing me to buy a PS2 at launch when I never owned a PS one was that I could play Metal Gear Solid, Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, etc. etc. Since I spent $400 for the PS2 plus assessories and one game it was nice to spend about 9 months gaming on the cheap and experiencing the exclusives I missed out on.

Microsoft is doing a great job helping Sony sales. I know PSP is selling real well and probably a good portion of those sales around the holidays where to parents or gamers who couldn't find a 360. You know that PS3 pre-orders are going to be greater and faster because people will be even more scared due to the 360 shortages. Now, if I want to play a "last generation" game I'll be buying it for PS2.