X-Box one: A comedy of (t)errors

[Brian]

Here's a hilight reel, which I found very informative:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbWgUO-Rqcw

[Grahf]

Well, this all seems to have gone over about as well as a fart in a crowded elevator.

Then there's this gem: http://www.videogamer.com/news/don_mattrick_if_youre_backwards_compatible_youre_really_backwards.html

I can understand why you might not want to be backwards compatible, but do you have to be so flippant about it? And as usual, I'd really like to know where he's pulling the "only 5% of people played old games on new hardware" thing, because something tells me if I got close enough to smell it I could probably take a pretty good guess.

[thepanda]

Because, really, who wants access to their library of games they've collected over the years when you can buy a new system with maybe two games you want to play on it?

Genius!

[Dracos]

Okay, I love backwards compatibility as much as the next guy, but asking seriously.

If I told you that you could have backwards compatibility for the xbox if you all paid 150-200 bucks more, what would you say?  "Hey, I could just buy myself a new xbox for that much?"

Probably.

There's always a lot of gnashing of teeth about it and for systems that can do it, it's a real feather in the cap, but practically speaking on both a software and hardware level, backwards compatibility is hard and getting harder and systems are being driven toward being cheaper if at all possible or go extinct.  Odds are if you have an awesome library of games, you also have a system that plays them.  I understand that space is an issue for some or it'd be nice to just have one thing to handle it all...

But it doesn't come for free and I don't think it's particularly fair to gnash about it to this degree.  I suspect that, being that there's a lot of money riding on it, that they probably do have better figures on it, but probably taken now rather than looking historically.  Either way, if they were in a good position to offer it as a cheap thing, they'd do that because its easy public appeal.  If they're not doing it, odds are its expensive and/or hard.

Sony choked hard on that last generation, and while the presence was super popular, I'm sure they walked away from it for the giant cost add it was to their manufacturing bill.

[Grahf]

That's a valid point. Like I said, my main problem was their attitude about handling it. They could have given the reason you gave, and everyone would have been, if not satisfied, then at least understanding. Instead it came off -- intentional or not -- as "people who want backwards compatibility are sillydumb".

[Merc]

I also agree with Drac's point on backwards compatability... for the physical disk backwards compatability, at least.

I have difficulty believing that it applies as much on the digital level. Note that they have specifically stated that you'll be allowed to transfer gamertags, achievements, avatars and Xbox LIVE profiles, as well as video and music content. Just not your digital games.

You can transfer that much else...but not your games. Really?

I don't have a 360 though, and I'm not a programmer of any sort, so I wouldn't really know much if anything about how things work there. Maybe the digital library of games were programmed for windows in the 360 and the new library uses mac. Anything's possible, I guess.

I can definitely see a split for running different physical components that were 8 years apart, but it still seems unlikely somehow that the software would be so radically different that you can't run a digital game now, especially again, when you can run everything else?

[Brian]

Well, your gamertag etc. are a database.  They just need the new frontend to talk to it.  That takes some work, and probably more than, say, updating a given game to work with the new hardware.

Unfortunately, there is some legitimacy to the fact that the hardware of the original Xbox or the 360 aren't actually 1:1.  The PS2 had PSX compatibility because the original PSX CPU was the PS2's I/O controller.  Throwing in the extra hardware isn't always going to be trivial.

I do think it's a problem that they haven't stuck with one architecture, or used CPUs that contain all the old instruction sets -- but I'm not hardware-designer knowledgeable, so there could be good reasons for that (aside from the obvious, "We don't want you to use it to run LINUX").  You would think Microsoft of all people would just use the same CPUs we put in desktops, but either they don't, or there are additional factors I don't get. :\

[VySaika]

If I told you that you could have backwards compatibility for the xbox if you all paid 150-200 bucks more, what would you say?  "Hey, I could just buy myself a new xbox for that much?"

For the Xbox? I wouldn't give a shit. For the PS4? Yes, I'd pay it. I would honestly pay an extra 200 for backwards compat on the PS4, esp if it ran PS3 *and* PS2 games. Why? Because in awhile, it won't be possible to "just buy a new one of the old system". They stop making them. I'd really like it if Sony made a special version of the PS4 with full backwards compat and sold it at a higher price, because I would pay that price. Being able to play my older games is kinda important to me, just like being able to watch old movies or read old books.

That said, I'd settle for being able to grab the games on PSN(re-buy them the same way we had to re-buy the movies we had on VHS back when DVD became the thing). But for some of the ones I want to play the most(Monster Rancher 4, Suikoden 3-5, etc) there's not a whole lot of demand for a downloadable version of 'em.

[Brian]

[...]Because in awhile, it won't be possible to "just buy a new one of the old system". They stop making them. [...]

This is the part that's on my mind the most, actually.  What _will_ I do once I can't get a PS2 anymore?  Because Sony announced an end to production on them in February....  Then that old library is useless, or I'll have to buy either a used PS2 or a seriously marked up unopened one.

I suppose Sony's stance on that is, "Then the devs can repackage it for sale on the new system, and you can buy it again!"  But having my entire library suddenly be decorative isn't such an awesome thing, and while emulation is a real thing, it's not an officially supported one. :\

[Brian]

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/publishers-to-receive-cut-of-xbox-one-pre-owned-sales-at-retail/0116137

Hummm.  Only really works if they do sell cheaper games, in my mind.  Otherwise the gaming public will generally not bite, I suspect.

[Dracos]

If I told you that you could have backwards compatibility for the xbox if you all paid 150-200 bucks more, what would you say?  "Hey, I could just buy myself a new xbox for that much?"

For the Xbox? I wouldn't give a shit. For the PS4? Yes, I'd pay it. I would honestly pay an extra 200 for backwards compat on the PS4, esp if it ran PS3 *and* PS2 games. Why? Because in awhile, it won't be possible to "just buy a new one of the old system". They stop making them. I'd really like it if Sony made a special version of the PS4 with full backwards compat and sold it at a higher price, because I would pay that price. Being able to play my older games is kinda important to me, just like being able to watch old movies or read old books.

That said, I'd settle for being able to grab the games on PSN(re-buy them the same way we had to re-buy the movies we had on VHS back when DVD became the thing). But for some of the ones I want to play the most(Monster Rancher 4, Suikoden 3-5, etc) there's not a whole lot of demand for a downloadable version of 'em.

Noted.  Agreed, it sucks that at some point the old system stops being manufactured and Emulation is not a complete handling.

The thing is that at the beginning and middle of a system's life-cycle, those of us who:
1)Have a large collection of previous gen games.
2)Have a non-functional old gen system or are worried enough about that happening soon to pay for it.

Is a small group.  It will be years before the availability of getting a PS2 system for under 100 bucks is an issue.  PS3 will have an even longer window.  The practical reality that most people that really want backwards compatibility already have a functioning system that plays the game (and the company still sells the product that plays it for a number of years still)

My oldest system in my house is 20~ years old, and does still run games.  And if it died tomorrow?

http://www.nintendosforsale.com/nintendo-nintendo-consoles-c-45_12.html There are refurbish speciality shops that can easily provide it.

In most cases, the console manufacturers are getting hit from both sides.  There's a lot of the audience that wasn't and still isn't keen with how high the price points got last generation.  Every dollar added to the cost cuts more and more of these folks out of even looking at the console for years.  There's the other side that looks and says "If you are upping the cost 200 bucks for backwards compatiblity, I can just go BUY one of the old systems right now for that price new." (Not yet for PS3, but i can't see it holding that 250 price point forever)

A pretty high powered laptop can easily be gotten for under a thousand dollars.  Is 500 dollars an okay point for something that just does games and television?  It's a rough time for speciality hardware and a lot of the designs are reflecting that for better or worse.

This is the market reality that gets looked at :\  It's not pretty.  I really hope that this generation is setting the foundation that since the games are digital products and hopefully the hardware is more standardized under the hood so that games can be transferred.  I don't hold a lot of hope there though.  *eyes the enormous number of studios closing over the last few years as an indication that the money is simply tight everywhere*

Edit:
I should mention, that the actual cost of adding Backwards Compatibility is often rather huge.  It might come down to just 20-200 dollars per person spread among all people who buy the system, but it's much larger if just put against people that want backwards compatibility.  That's an unfortunate scale thing :(

[Brian]

Actually, one problem becomes evident from this.  And that's the fact that console costs are climbing, in an era when PC investments for gaming systems are lasting longer and longer.

I'm speculating that this could be a tipping point where for value of investment, the PC is the better choice over a console.

'cause, look at all the problems we have with the PC library's backwards compatibility.  Since we have DOSBox, well....

...yeah.

While it was also just speculation, I read that this generation (PS4, XBOXone) of hardware might very well be the last.

Considering that, I'm starting to agree.

[Dracos]

Quite possibly.

And it remains hard to see good sales figures for many things in the PC space.  Hacking together things quick or long tail FTP/MMO systems seem to consume an awful lot of the potential paying base and a lot of games that historically have been pretty cool just would never work in that model.

[Iron Dragoon]

Microsoft has announced that they 'can,' but have not yet offically decided to, use the new Kinect's face identification as a DRM device.

The new Kinect can recognize your face and how many people are in the room, and if you have too many people, or whatever restrictions Microsoft decides to use, the XBox One will not play the game or movie.

They also announced that XBox One Kinect's microphone will always be on, and that the XBox One will not function without the Kinect.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/24/xbox-one-will-kinect-2-use-visual-drm

"The users consuming the content on a display device are monitored so that if the number of user-views licensed is exceeded, remedial action may be taken," it reads.

[Kt3]

That news is yuck.

Almost as yuck as the blatant fanboyism in the comment section.