Support NeoGAF

[rastex]

that's exactly what I've been saying all along That's what Allard said MS wants to do.

I know man, I'm just trying to spell it out a bit clearer for those stubborn fools that think BC is the only way a console can survive. BC IS TEH STANEDERD!!!! Ya, that's why the original PS, SNES, Genesis, GC, Xbox were all BC right? GB and the PS2 are the only consoles that have been BC. I mean, sure they're the 2 of the most successful devices released, but that's also due to a TON of other factors than just BC. BC isn't totally useless, but it's definitely not that important to a console not that important at all.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

No...what they want to do is ditch the current system architecture as fast as they can 'cos they're losing thier asses on it. They're copping it up "more compelling software" to help sell the idea of the new system, but how much "more compelling" can software be on a system with only 3 to 4 more years of "better" technology going to do it? If they can't provide compelling software NOW then how is slightly better tech. gonna do it? It's not. It's all just PR to get you to think that skimping on industry standerd features and slightly beefing up the hardware is gonna end up giving you "more compelling software". Some of the most compelling games generation after generation are NOT the ones that have the best graphics anyways, so if they can't do it now, why is this new system suddenly gonna give it to us?

I'm being extra hard on MS, but that's only 'cos they boasted about how much more powerful the X-BOX was and then when they get raped on the business side of it (component prices not going down, system is not turning a profit, nVidea deal, etc.), they suddenly re-think thier whole approach, cut this generation short, skimp on features, lose thier power edge and have the gall to say that this will give us gamers better results. Pfft...no, it's just to make investors happy. All along MS investors have not liked how much money MS has poured into this, so now MS has to make a profit on it somehow to appease them. And how? Not by waiting until the technology is powerful enough to emulate X-BOX games on the next X-BOX, but instead chopping the feature (as well as other features) in favor of a cheaper, more profitable hardware...all while pissing off thier current fanbase by cutting this generation short.

MS would better serve thier fans *and* themselves by waiting until the technology is powerful enough to play current X-BOX games on the next one. This would give thier current generation more time to garner more fans/support (which is what the X-BOX was suppossed to be about), give them more time to make more powerful hardware so they don't lose the edge thier fans expect, and ultimatly give them more time to make this suppossed "more compelling software" they're talking about. But no, they wanna ditch this generation for next ASAP so that they can turn a profit faster all while acting like it's gonna be great to buy a new system every 3 to 4 years so as to get a "headstart" or some other garbage.

I guess I don't blame them, but it just angers me that everyone is dancing around it like it's not a problem. They should have thought about this before they made the first X-BOX.

 

[LuckyBrand]

i think we should all just wait til we know ANYTHING firm about xbox 2 before making huge multi-paragraphed essays about it...

if the launch games are right, and the price is right, it could do great...

 

[DrGAKMAN]

The fact that he compares the DVD remote to Backwards compatability and says people will be playing Halo 2 on LIVE(no reference to Xbox) pretty much spells out XBox 2 will have a BC add-on. Alos he says the XBox will be discontinued sooner than other consoles.

He also says they are considering on BC, but gamers wont be interested in it when the XBox 2 first comes out. Basically the BC addon wont come out at launch, bu the goes on to say if gamers REALY want it they will consider putting it at higher priority, ie availible at launch.

Okay...I read this and I'm calming down about MS. I just dislike them and I especially hate them being in console gaming.

However, suppossing they don't have a HD or BC out of the box (and I don't think they will) and they make an add-on that does both then that's okay...I guess. But it's still a sort of gip when Sony & Nintendo will be doing BC it no charge. Plus I don't see this add-on being too cheap (X-BOX chispset + HD) and if it's not available at launch then I think that's rediculous. They should discontinue the current unprofitable X-BOX, launch the next one at $200 and have the BC add-on/HD for $100...I could see that maybe working, but if they try some garbage like making the next X-BOX $300 without a HD or BC, possibly no next-generation disc (HD-DVD or BR) support *and* less powerful than PS3...utterly rediculous!

 

[LuckyBrand]

hmm, those are some good thoughts..

i could see them releasing the HD/BC as a bundle..

alot of times, when you put a HD out there or any add on, is the lack of games that take immediate usage of it..

but, if the HD comes bundled with backwards compatability, it will be like a built in base of 200-300 games that can now be played because of this "add-on", and take the sting out of buying something that isnt that widely used off the bat..

 

[Suikoguy]

hmm, those are some good thoughts..

i could see them releasing the HD/BC as a bundle..

alot of times, when you put a HD out there or any add on, is the lack of games that take immediate usage of it..

but, if the HD comes bundled with backwards compatability, it will be like a built in base of 200-300 games that can now be played because of this "add-on", and take the sting out of buying something that isnt that widely used off the bat..

It takes sales of millions for an addon to work (see eyetoy)
But if its less then 1 million, don't expect much but a few titles to use it (see ps2 HDD)
Backwards compatilbity through a purchase would not work, especially if the console is 300 to start.

 

[Daxter Too]

It takes sales of millions for an addon to work (see eyetoy)
But if its less then 1 million, don't expect much but a few titles to use it (see ps2 HDD)
Backwards compatilbity through a purchase would not work, especially if the console is 300 to start.

Ummm, the point of a backwards compatability addon would be that is is usable by all Xbox titles. It would basically be a Nvidia Xbox 1 card encased in plastic. MS didn't go with Nvidia for the Xbox 2, but they most certainly could come to an agreement to package and sell Xbox1 video cards.

 

[LuckyBrand]

yah I think suikoguy kind of missed the point of my posting...

 

[SolidSnakex]

Sony's no less guilty with the required HD, network adapter, multi-tap and Memory card business. Backwards compatability is, arguably, of secondary importance compared to these features, which you have to pay upwards of $150 for in some cases. )

With those things you just listed, with the exception of 4 controller slots, none of them are a standard. Before the PS2 was released only 1 system had a built in network adapter. With BC, whenever systems can use backwards compatibility they have. Sony's used it with the PS2 and will for the PS3 also. Nintendo's used BC for every one of their handhelds since the GB, and they'll be using it for their next console. So having that feature is much more of a standard than anything you just mentioned (except for 4 ports). I think it also says alot that those systems i've mentioned with BC have been really big sellers.

 

[element]

b/c should be an addon. let the people who want it pay for it. MS would have to assemble a team to make it and test it to a consumer level, and I personally would much rather have them spend those resources on pushing gaming for the future, making new xbox live features, better understanding and tools for XNA, develop better ways to stop piracy, and making the mobo more streamline to reduce cost, not supporting old games.

 

[Duckhuntdog]

b/c should be an addon. let the people who want it pay for it. MS would have to assemble a team to make it and test it to a consumer level, and I personally would much rather have them spend those resources on pushing gaming for the future, making new xbox live features, better understanding and tools for XNA, develop better ways to stop piracy, and making the mobo more streamline to reduce cost, not supporting old games.

I can shorten this to the following: Please MS, less bang for our buck with Xbox 2.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Yeah I was hard on Microsoft, not 'cos they couldn't predict the future, but 'cos they didn't think before getting into console gaming. They boasted so much about having teh power and now they're going back on it 'cos they didn't plan ahead. They thought they were gonna march right in and take over. Buy this developer here, buy another here, jump a "generation ahead" in PC video cards and other expensive off the shelf parts all while dumping millions into advertising without thinking of how it could backfire (business is business afterall, and you HAVE to think about how to profit sometime, even if you can't "take over" just yet).

Granted, they had to do some of that to make a name for themselves, but what they SHOULD have done was make nice with Sega (not ditch them on DC as they did) and eventually take them over making them the first party for the X-BOX. Offer some sort of trade-in deal for DC owners to make nice with Sega fans too...MS has done rebates and such before with MSN and their other products...it really could've gone over well as well as build a quick fanbase out of existing Sega fans. But now Sega fans are spread thin amoungst the three consoles. Imagine if all of Sega's games were consolidated to the X-BOX...all Sega fans could've stood up and said "hey...NOW we've got a system!" But no...MS had to have too much control and they lost Sega.

That said I'm GLAD Microsoft didn't get Sega. Then they would've been a REAL threat! As of then and now I see them as sorta running blind.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Other than the potential hassle of shelf space and hooking it up, one would think that the old XBOX 1 could be found for less than $75 at the time of XBOX 2's launch. If someone's using BC as a major reason to buy a new system, I think that system's probably in trouble...meaning that the new system is obviously lacking in a critical 'I NEED THIS SHIT NOW!'-kind of way that comes from having irresistable launch and super-kicky first year software. As a secondary reason to buy the system, it is understandable, but those that deem it that necessary can buy an add-on or old system to fill that need.

 

[element]

I can shorten this to the following: Please MS, less bang for our buck with Xbox 2.

why do you say that? who says you wont get more? why is b/c more important then new features that you haven't heard of yet?

If someone's using BC as a major reason to buy a new system, I think that system's probably in trouble...meaning that the new system is obviously lacking in a critical 'I NEED THIS SHIT NOW!'-kind of way that comes from having irresistable launch and super-kicky first year software. As a secondary reason to buy the system, it is understandable, but those that deem it that necessary can buy an add-on or old system to fill that need.

Preach on!! So true. People buy new systems for the games that are on it, not because they can play their old stuff.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

why do you say that? who says you wont get more? why is b/c more important then new features that you haven't heard of yet?

I don't exactly know what you mean there. This isn't JUST about BC, this is about MS cutting features, they'll likely be losing the built-in HD, extra's as well as the power edge. On top of that they might not even have either the HD-DVD or BR format's in the system and Sony will use all of this against them. So they're skimping on the features and power edge that they used to garner thier support AND cutting thier current generation short by prematurly jumping the gun for some sort of "headstart"...how is any of that good?

If they make a nice system for $200 with this "compelling" software and all that and offer an HD/BC add-on at launch for those who want it for $100 or less then they're doing better, but if they're coming out with no sort of BC and at $300 all while not offering the power edge or even a next generation disc format...boy...that'll just be sad for them.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

That's a a lot of "might not"'s, Gakman. Thing is, nothing is publicly concrete about what or what might not be in the final system. Specs might be finalized this year, but that doesn't preclude the addition of features as MS sees fit based on the competition's movement pre-Xenon launch.

 

[rastex]

DrGAKMAN, who are you? What do you know about consoles, consumers, the market or anything like that? Who are you to say what people want/need or what a company is doing right/wrong? Why should anybody here listen to your opinion or read what you write?

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Mighty Hedgehog...

-BC: read the Moore & Allard interviews, it's not happening...and even if MS wanted it in the next system it wouldn't be possibly without adding an extra $100 on top of each system and working something out with nVidea

-power edge they had this generation: not there, that's gonna be Sony's next time around, the next X-BOX will most likely be the weakest of the three as they're coming out first and looking to make profits as soon as they can, which means not splurging on power like they did this generation

-earlier launch: they've stressed the whole headstart thing a couple of times and it's heavily rumored that lots of titles are slipping into next generation already

-extra features beyond gaming: MS has said no to this, plus they're again wanting to be profitable next generation

-HD-DVD or BR support: that's the only "maybe" I can think of, but I doubt they put this in 'cos neither format will be too soon for it to make any difference as a movie format and they'll probably opt to save money...MAYBE HD-DVD might make it, but I think 2005 is too soon and HD-DVD might be the lesser of the two for a future movie standerd which means Sony wins again since they may be waiting 'til 2007 (a perfect time for HDTV and HD movie format market penetration) and they have an inside road to BR

 

[element]

-power edge they had this generation: not there, that's gonna be Sony's next time around, the next X-BOX will most likely be the weakest of the three as they're coming out first and looking to make profits as soon as they can, which means not splurging on power like they did this generation

i think you might be a little shocked...

extra features beyond gaming: MS has said no to this, plus they're again wanting to be profitable next generation

Built in? Not a chance. But able too, most definately. Look at Music Mixer and Media Extender for Xbox to be the first encarnations of this.

it's heavily rumored that lots of titles are slipping into next generation already

like what?

MS has lots of plans and some great cards hidden in their sleaves.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

i think you might be a little shocked...

So what is it? 6 dual core PPCs? 3 triple core PPCs? Heh. Ah, too expensive-sounding.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Shocked? No, I *personally* could care less about power or specs 'cos I know that all three will have comparably beautiful A/V next generation that most level-headed casual gamers won't be able to tell much difference between...

BUT...you're in complete denial if you don't think Sony won't exploit the FACT that the next X-BOX will be the least powerful with thier PS3 hype train. Alot of X-BOX fans were brought in by MS having this edge in power, but where will that leave them when they end up being the "lesser" of the three?

It doesn't really matter in the end, but look at this: the GAMECUBE was skimpy on features (online & DVD), and in the eyes of the public it's seen as "the black sheep" of the three current systems isn't it?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Gakman, element=oxygen, a Microsoft Games Studios guy.

 

[Blazing Sword]

Isn't everyone getting ahead of themselves? Especially DrGakMAn?

Where in hell is the announcement of XBOX 2 launching in 2005, or even so much earlier than PS3 and Revolution? For all anyone knows, the launch has a good chance of happening much closer to the competition.

BC would be missed, and it may be a mistake, but MS wants XB2 games to be the only games you want to play.

The XBOX 2 may or may not have a hard drive(its still not official), but I'm willing to bet it has an alternative internal storage device. Hence, the partnering with that devloper of flash memory to design some type of new storage for XBOX 2 perhaps.

Less powerful? Says who? Because you think it may launch so much earlier? Again, who said it was going to? MS did'nt, thats for sure. Maybe a few months at the most, I'm willing to bet again.

In conclusion, you guys are arguing on nothing but hearsay and conjecture. NOTHING about XBOX 2 has been confirmed yet. NOTHING.

NO LAUNCH DATE
NO SPECS
NO GAMES
NO NAME
NOT EVEN A NEW COLOR SCHEME...

has been announced.

Yet some of you are already writing it off. The very definition of foolish.

 

[cvxfreak]

Yeah, I like how Allard states DVD playback is a must right after saying XBox1 playback is expendable because gamers don't want it or something... wouldn't you think it's the other way around?

No, I don't think it's the other way around, it IS the other way around. I don't know about other people here, but I think I have enough DVD players to suit myself for the next 15 or so years. I'm not a fan of double standards, but I think this will become an issue with backwards compatibility on the PS3 moreso than the Revolution.

Look at it this way...

Pretty much most people here own some sort of DVD Player. That's a given, especially for PS2, Xbox and most modern PC owners. But will it be necessary for the PS3, Revolution and Xenon to play DVDs? Manufacturing costs and spending costs can be cut down for the next gen systems by cutting off the DVD Player. It really isn't necessary this time around.

On the issue of backwards compatibilty, however, I'm glad Sony and Nintendo are sticking with the model. But I in the meantime own 3 PS2s (2 US, 1 JP) and 3 GCs (1 US, 1 modded, 1 Panasonic Q). Will having one or two PS3 and Revolutions negate about $1000 worth of spending on the older hardware (realistically it should be $500 but that's still a big amount)? Yes it will, and it makes me feel a tad irritated.

On the Xbox front, the HD obviously poses some problems. As for the PS2 HDD and NA, and the GC GameBoy Player/upcoming accessory, will they work on Revolution and PS3? Probably not. And that's what sucks. I am technically paying for extra with these extra functions.

So, in the perfect world of money spending, cutting down DVD and older system playback will reduce the costs of the next set of systems by a considerable amount (as much as $100 I should say). But at the same time, the convenience just isn't there. Why have 4 systems on deck when you can have 2?

You tell me, because I don't have an answer for myself.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Gakman, element=oxygen, a Microsoft Games Studios guy.

And...?

It's his job to hype MS up. Doesn't stop PS3 from trouncing the next X-BOX since it's been worked on longer, has more invested in it AND will be coming out a year or more later giving it an edge! I think some MS fans are absolutly ~delusional~ if they think that the specs of the next X-BOX will somehow be on par with PS3's a year ahead of time and somehow STILL be cheap enough for a mass market price, let alone on a cost efficient business model that's aiming to turn a profit sooner. I think that's why I'm so picky when it comes to this topic, I mean it's oh so believable that MS will give them this all-powerful PS3 killer a year before PS3 even launches and yet it's out of the question that Nintendo will have a comparitivly powerful system next generation??? I'm not a Sony nut who thinks no one can touch the Cell, nor do I think any of this spec-humping matters to the naked eye, but it does bother me that MS believers clutch to this security blanket of MS's power & money giving them whatever they want despite the FACT the system will be launching way before PS3 and who's aim is to be more cost efficient (the opposite of the first X-BOX)?

 

[Blazing Sword]

And...?

It's his job to hype MS up. Doesn't stop PS3 from trouncing the next X-BOX since it's been worked on longer, has more invested in it AND will be coming out a year or more later giving it an edge! I think some MS fans are absolutly ~delusional~ if they think that the specs of the next X-BOX will somehow be on par with PS3's a year ahead of time and somehow STILL be cheap enough for a mass market price, let alone on a cost efficient business model that's aiming to turn a profit sooner. I think that's why I'm so picky when it comes to this topic, I mean it's oh so believable that MS will give them this all-powerful PS3 killer a year before PS3 even launches and yet it's out of the question that Nintendo will have a comparitivly powerful system next generation??? I'm not a Sony nut who thinks no one can touch the Cell, nor do I think any of this spec-humping matters to the naked eye, but it does bother me that MS believers clutch to this security blanket of MS's power & money giving them whatever they want despite the FACT the system will be launching way before PS3 and who's aim is to be more cost efficient (the opposite of the first X-BOX)?

Go back up a couple posts and read what I wrote. Right now you are just rambling on something you know nothing about.

 

[element]

Doesn't stop PS3 from trouncing the next X-BOX since it's been worked on longer, has more invested in it AND will be coming out a year or more later giving it an edge!

Cell has been worked on for a while, not PS3. Hell, SCEA is JUST starting to hire tool programmers for PS3 games.

yet it's out of the question that Nintendo will have a comparitivly powerful system next generation???

I don't see anyone doubting Nintendo will have a powerful system in this thread. My personal opinion is that they won't go for the most powerful system because they will have their market no matter what they do. People want Zelda and are willing to pay whatever for it.

who's aim is to be more cost efficient

I wouldn't say that is their only goal. I mean, they do understand it is a game system and they will lose money on it. Most of the areas of cost efficient is signing better deals with OEM and trying to obtain the IP on all the chips in the system.
Since MS went with an Intel chip, they could only get them from Intel. Since they went with an Nvidia chip, they could only get them from Nvidia. Both were able to overcharge.
If MS is able to obtain the IP on the CPU and GPU they can take the spec to 'Jimmy's CPU Factory' if they come with the lowest bid. They aren't tied to any company for manufactuing of the chips. This alone will save millions.

 

[Li Mu Bai]

You guys at GAF are usually ahead of the curve, but we had this discussion on B3D forums in MAY nearly a month ago. Although BC wasn't the focus, many other interesting aspects from the article were. Some various quotes:

Allard continued: "Right now you have your audio chip and you graphics chip and your CPU, and you're constantly trying to figure out the balances. In the next generation we're going to have so much silicon, so much raw computing horsepower - developers are going to be able to use this in interesting and exciting ways."

Dave Baumann-AKA: "We'll dump specialised audio hardware, give you a shed load of CPU power that has some graphics capabilities and a unified shader model on the graphics and let the developer decide what he wants and where to process it."

Regarding XNA as a type of comprehensive specialized middleware:

DeanoC: No amount of middleware will hide the hardware that well in a console (at least until were working on virtualised machines). Making things run well on multi-processor (with some asymmetries like a graphics or sound processor) transparently is just about impossible (at least while we are programming in C).

Of course their is some dedicated hardware just not a lot...

"Art is the highest cost component of game development, and so much of the art is really repetitive and really intensive, and then doesn't come out to be very realistic. You know, bricks in a wall - very repeated textures."

No one else thinks that the removal of the "art asset" is a mistake? Wasn't there a thread denouncing it once the initial Xenon specs. were revealed? Or after this aspect was known to be in absentia? This appears to me to be opening the floodgates to extremely similar or identical looking aspects of shovelware IMO. IIRC, doesn't the GC excel at producing repeated textures moreso than any other system? Allard seems to be masking it with a simplistic brick wall analogy, but the art aspect is much more comprehensive than what he leads you to believe. As all repeating textures need not look "identical" IMO. And without memory segmentation, or a minimal dedicated audio amount, the tradeoffs will be moreso than even in the current X-Box model utilizing UMA.

Vince:I would have assumed sound processing and it's usage would lend itself to a more fixed functional or DSP type device than siphoning away main resources on it and increasing complexity. *shrug* I'd hope Sony and Nintendo don't do this. Um What I actually said is that fixed functionality is bad when applied to tasks whose resource bound is arbitrarily high or increases arbitrarily based on the given situation - which is why many parts of the rasterization pipeline that are dependant upon static bounds (say output pixels on a screen) should be fixed and see speed-ups.

Now, if you want to make an argument saying sound complexity can scale at a rate which is analogous to graphic computation, then that would be a valid argument. I'd still contend that it's basically fixed and would be better handeled by an independant and more fixed functional IC which doesn't use central resources due to the lesser perceived importance of sound and the limited output formats that exist.

Fafalada: Look at it from perspective of sound engineers - for decades they've been getting the shaft (literally) on game hardware.
Finally they're getting some real power to play with - even if they'll have to fight others for it
Anyway more general purpose power it's always double edged sword, but we've been pushing for this in graphics, so why not sound.


Plus a ton of other interesting perspectives.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Go back up a couple posts and read what I wrote. Right now you are just rambling on something you know nothing about.

Sorry, I started typing that post before I saw yours.

You're right, we DON'T know the EXACT specifics of the next X-BOX...I'm simply going by what we do know thus far. And while it may not be much to some people, what MS has said thus far about it at least gives us something to talk about.

Hell, I'm willing to admit that after they learn more about thier competition's plans that they may go back to the drawing boards on some aspects and I could be completly wrong about them doing a less powerful/premature system...BUT...but from what we've heard thus far we can speculate, assume, debate, predict, discuss, etc. on it...why, because this is a message board and that's usually what people do when they post in message boards.

I still stick by alot of what I say if what we know now doesn't change much...
-premature launch cutting the current generation short = bad
-losing an industry standerd feature like BC = bad
-taking away features in general = bad
-using the power edge they had this generation to garner support and then losing it next generation = bad

 

[element]

-losing an industry standerd feature like BC = bad

when the hell did b/c become an industry standard? Two platforms in the last 15 years have supported b/c, PS2 and Gameboy. I hardly say that is an 'industry standard'. And who says they won't have b/c? I think Allard and Moore are just saying it going to be a built in feature and while they dont consider it a MUST HAVE feature, they are more then open to explore the possiblity.

-taking away features in general = bad

what are they taking away? are they taking away xbox live? online? I mean really, what do you KNOW they are removing? And these 'features' they are taking away, lets see a list.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Sorry...a feature that Nintendo & Sony will have in their next system is IMO, an undustry standerd...a feature that MS doesn't have and yet thier competition WILL have will be seen as a negative. Going by what we've heard them say thus far I don't think it'll be built-in, I think it'll be available as an add-on which is better than nothing, but it's still sorta annoying when the competition will be including it standerd!

Assuming they want to get rid of one of the bigger cost wastes (the HD) and if BC isn't going to be possible on the next X-BOX then I see them removing the HD (again, going by what we know and what they've said). Taking away said HD means that the whole built-in giant memory card is gone (no biggy, just buy a memory card, but still, it's something the old X-BOX had, but the new one won't) and it also means that the mod's and CD ripping can't be done (unless they make it possible by memory card). Plus there was alot of assumptions that the next X-BOX would be a media hub and might include TiVo features...well, Moore said features beyond gaming aren't going to happen (unless they make a PSX-like X-BOX someday with such features built-in). I would also call the power edge and BC itself features, so that's my list. Yes, made up of some speculation and assumptions, but really though, if they're gonna aim for a more profitable system structure then I don't think I'm too far off.

 

[Mr_Furious]

If BC is an add-on for the Xbox2 then it'll have to sport a HD. Too many games and XBL require it for it not to be included.

BTW, I wonder how MS plans to handle XBL with regards to Xbox2 and any downloadable content.

 

[Pug]

And silly me thought the next generation as the previous would be all about games. Maybe I should join the masses(!) and buy my next game console on how many triangle thingies it chucks around, how emotional the emotional chip will be and how many Giga Hz the GPU chippy thing is. Funny thing I always thought that looks like a good game I would like to play that as in ICO, HALO and many others. From now on I'm making my buying decisions on technical spec, cos I know its a good game.

 

[element]

none of the next-gen system will have a built in tivo feature. just costs too much. having a video input it just an additional cost that not everyone is willing to use.

that is a lot of assumptions in their based on hear-say and inconclusive rumors. many of the features you listed can be handled, if designed correctly. you're trying to pigeon hole the system, you're not thinking out of the box very much at all.

 

[jarrod]

when the hell did b/c become an industry standard? Two platforms in the last 15 years have supported b/c, PS2 and Gameboy. I hardly say that is an 'industry standard'.

Funny enough, with a combined userbase of some 360+ million between them, I'd say "PlayStation" and "GameBoy" are indeed the very definitions of "industry standard". This generation alone the two backwards compatible platforms (gba & ps2) number 121 million, compared to 44 million for everything else (DC, GC, XBox, N-Gage, NGPC, GP32, Wonderswan, Nuon, etc).

Microsoft will be at a disadvantage next generation if Xenon doesn't play XBox games, period. At best it'll be seen as a superfluous extra to be missing, not important. At worst it could lower Xenon's overall percieved value, just as lacking DVD somehow made GameCube a "lesser" platform this time. GameCube 2 indeed...

 

[Mr_Furious]

What I find interesting is that Allard is referring to the Japanese market regarding the initial success of the PS2, stating it was able to play DVDs and was cheaper than a stand alone DVD player to boot. What about the U.S.? I seem to recall it being pretty important for many consumers to be able to play their old PS1 games on the PS2. We didn't have the problem of overly expensive DVD players to deal with. I've overheard many consumers while browsing the stores back then note the BC feature and being able to still play all their older games.

 

[NWO]

And silly me thought the next generation as the previous would be all about games.

It will be about the games. And that's why BC is so important.

Why do I want to stray over to the Xbox2 if I have a PS2? I'll just pick up the PS3 because I'll have tons of games to play for it right off the bat.

Its important to get people from the previous generation to move over to the next console and (I don't have any numbers) but I'm guessing MORE PEOPLE will if you have BC than not.

Not having BC puts you on the same level as somebody who has never owned that console before. Thus it won't have the upper hand over anybody.

And seeing as how Xbox2 won't have a Halo game on it for awhile they'd be smart to put BC so that people can play Halo and Halo 2 on it.

You people would be surprised at how people are very loyal to the console that they have the most games already bought and if they can play those games again on the next system it is a selling point for them. Many people buy a PS2 because they can play their PS1 games on it. People all the time did come in and say "hey doesn't the PS2 play PS1 games when the PS2 first came out".

And if MS wants to get their foot in the door and steal some users away from Nintendo and Sony then they are going to need everything that they have in it. You guys constantly bash Nintendo for being different but when MS wants to remove something (harddrive) and not add something (BC) then your all for this. So basically you like being screwed over as a gamer and getting less for your money than what other systems are giving you.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

BC became industry standard when the Sony incorporated BC into the PS2 and became the 1st home console to do so. Anything less is suicide.

Next gen, the horsepower on consoles alone would probably mean all multiconsoles title WILL look the same; especially if the consoles come out around the same time. I mean, the xbox now has that edge because you know that titles like Splinter Cell (classic example) will look best on the xbox. Xbox2 will not have claims to the best (...of the lot) versions... they will lose their edge. NO HD and NO BC will be doom for the console.

 

[Fujisawa]

Good god, is it that hard to spell out 'backward compatibility'? It took me all this time to figure out that you weren't talking about the caveman game on Xbox.

 

[Norse]

Backwards compatibility is a near-must. I'm glad Nintendo and Sony are going with the model.

yep, I love playing all my N64 games on my cube.

-Norse

 

[DarienA]

BC became industry standard when the Sony incorporated BC into the PS2 and became the 1st home console to do so.

?? The PS2 wasn't the first console with BC... just the first home console in a few generations.

 

[Norse]

BC became industry standard when the Sony incorporated BC into the PS2 and became the 1st home console to do so. Anything less is suicide.

Next gen, the horsepower on consoles alone would probably mean all multiconsoles title WILL look the same; especially if the consoles come out around the same time. I mean, the xbox now has that edge because you know that titles like Splinter Cell (classic example) will look best on the xbox. Xbox2 will not have claims to the best (...of the lot) versions... they will lose their edge. NO HD and NO BC will be doom for the console.

Mark it down. Xbox2 will have a HD or equal. Backward compatability will not be included though.

-Norse

 

[DrGAKMAN]

Funny enough, with a combined userbase of some 360+ million between them, I'd say "PlayStation" and "GameBoy" are indeed the very definitions of "industry standard". This generation alone the two backwards compatible platforms (gba & ps2) number 121 million, compared to 44 million for everything else (DC, GC, XBox, N-Gage, NGPC, GP32, Wonderswan, Nuon, etc).

Microsoft will be at a disadvantage next generation if Xenon doesn't play XBox games, period. At best it'll be seen as a superfluous extra to be missing, not important. At worst it could lower Xenon's overall percieved value, just lacking DVD somehow made GameCube a "lesser" platform at this time. GameCube 2 indeed...

WHAM...BAM, where were you and NWO yesterday?

I'm not saying that lacking BC will *kill* the next X-BOX, but you're mistaken if you think taking away this feature and others (HD, power edge, etc.) will NOT look good to people buying a new system. A new system is an investment, and while games are the most important part of a system, features are also a part of that investment.

Possibly a good thing MS could do is offer a $100 HD/BC add-on available at launch and offer the base next generation X-BOX for $200, that would be like rewarding thier current fans (who don't need BC right away since they already have the current X-BOX) with a lower pricepoint and offering a next generation system for a nice price with the option of a HD/BC add-on if people want it. But then again...I see them downplaying BC, not offering such an add-on at launch and pricing thier next system at $300 anyways...in which case we're back to square one on this issue.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

BC became industry standard when the Sony incorporated BC into the PS2 and became the 1st home console to do so. Anything less is suicide.

Next gen, the horsepower on consoles alone would probably mean all multiconsoles title WILL look the same; especially if the consoles come out around the same time. I mean, the xbox now has that edge because you know that titles like Splinter Cell (classic example) will look best on the xbox. Xbox2 will not have claims to the best (...of the lot) versions... they will lose their edge. NO HD and NO BC will be doom for the console.

How quickly people forget the Atari 7800 (released in 1986), the first backwardly compatible console. Then there's the Genesis being able to play Master System game via an add-on (the Power Base Converter in 1989). Then there's the Super Grafx being able to play HuCard PC-E games and followed by the GBC...and then there's the PS2. Nit picky, I know.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

OMFG. like the atari still fucking matters! I played the atari when I was a kid but even then, I could tell it was rubbish and not that fun. Gaming wasn't even mainstream then(not that mainstream is a good benchmark) but the psone/2 gen is mainstream and BC is hugely important for pulling in punters. The PS2 has set the standard.

yes nit picking.

 

[DarienA]

OMFG. like the atari still fucking matters! I played the atari when I was a kid but even then, I could tell it was rubbish and not that fun. Gaming wasn't even mainstream then(not that mainstream is a good benchmark) but the psone/2 gen is mainstream and BC is hugely important for pulling in punters. The PS2 has set the standard.

yes nit picking.

Yes and because you claim the Atari systems were not fun.. that definitely makes it the truth!

 

[MightyHedgehog]

WHAM...BAM, where were you and NWO yesterday?

I'm not saying that lacking BC will *kill* the next X-BOX, but you're mistaken if you think taking away this feature and others (HD, power edge, etc.) will NOT look good to people buying a new system. A new system is an investment, and while games are the most important part of a system, features are also a part of that investment.

Possibly a good thing MS could do is offer a $100 HD/BC add-on available at launch and offer the base next generation X-BOX for $200, that would be like rewarding thier current fans (who don't need BC right away since they already have the current X-BOX) with a lower pricepoint and offering a next generation system for a nice price with the option of a HD/BC add-on if people want it. But then again...I see them downplaying BC, not offering such an add-on at launch and pricing thier next system at $300 anyways...in which case we're back to square one on this issue.

I'm certain that there will be an add-on available for the system not too far from launch...making the backward compatibility thing moot. Obviously DVD playback doesn't mean shit anymore as you buy decent DVD players for $30. Next gen DVD standards are not an issue until more people have HDTV, and that's still going slowly. All that matters for MS is having new software to prove the point of their new hardware...as that's all that matters with any new system. PS2 would have sold just as many units as they did not having BC in the box. Why do I believe that? Because so many people paid $20 for a plastic stand that was really unesscesary. The option is all you need, not necessarily as a built-in one that might compromise the full-on development of the hardware.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Yes and because you claim the Atari systems were not fun.. that definitely makes it the truth!

Thumbs up.

 

[Mr_Furious]

What exactly will MS's next Xbox offer to consumers that the competition won't obviously offer? Sure it'll be out first but will that really matter? The Xbox offered consumers new features the competition didn't. It's sounding more and more like this is not going to be the case next gen for MS.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

What exactly will MS's next Xbox offer to consumers that the competition won't obviously offer? Sure it'll be out first but will that really matter? The Xbox offered consumers new features the competition didn't. It's sounding more and more like this is not going to be the case next gen for MS.

What new exclusive feature? How about XBOX 2 games.