Microsoft Exec: "If You're Backwards Compatible, You're Really Backwards"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
 

FalloutJack:

Strazdas:
Oh, not again.

Straddy, that wasn't an opinion. I actually researched classic gaming before. It's much stronger than you think. There are even companies that build old consoles or combo-consoles for the old school crowd. It's a market that gets tapped, period. If it wasn't, then stores dedicated for it just couldn't exist. That's simple business economics.

Oh, classic gamign sure does exist, my point was that it is small enough for the big companies to ignore it as insignificant and not something everyone does like people here try to make it to be.
Also, straddy? i knw people called me strazzy before, but how did that came in?

Dragonbums:
First off, that 5% is bullshit. Every single person I know utilizes backwards compabitbiilty in some way, shape, or form. Where did they get those statistics from? From some obscure poll? The amount of people clamoring for BC compatibility, and the big deal that many major gaming news sites have about the feature tells me that 5% is a load of bullshit. Except for those that don't like BC anyway.

The WiiU isn't old generation. It is simply less powerful next generation software. Also, how does this invalidate Nintendo in any way, shape, or form?
So what?
Sony didn't want to do it with the PS3 and that was "last gen" software. They even took it out in later models. In fact, since the PS3 and Xbox 360 era, both those companies have practically whined about this feature.

It may or may not be bullshit, as all other research done previuosly showed a smaller, but not that far off number. if anything, 5% is generous.
anecdotical evidence about your friends not-withstanding.
WiiU for all intends and purposes is an old hardware to begin with. It does not invalidate Nintendo, it invalidates the statement that NextGen (or current gen if we take PCs) should fully support a decade old software. You can support a decade old software with a decade old hardware, duh. mch easier that way. Not to mentino that MS seems to be doing mistake Sony did by making a unique cell based processor they basted about.

Spot1990:
Dude there's entire stores that exist just to sell old games and consoles. They only just discontinued the PS2 this year because it and it's games were still selling. All three consoles sell previous generation's games on their online marketplaces and there's been a buttload of HD remakes of PS2/xbox games and all this is because nobody wants to play older games is it? No it's because most older console games are being bought second hand. If the companies make it harder to play an original copy it means they can sell you the game again digitally or crank out a half arsed HD remake like Konami with Silent Hill. Where are you pulling numbers like 1-3% or "less than a hundred hardcore fans" Because those people must have crazy money if a few dozen of them are keeping entire markets afloat with their business.

Yes, there are stores like that. They take such a small amount of gaming market share most people dont even count them in. PS2 did sell quite well. HD remakes are same as Hollywood remakes. a nice way to cash in on nostalgia and known names without needing to invent something.
The 3% were actual research i read around half a year ago, the hardcore fans comment i was pulling my of my ass based on what i saw on gaming sites, where new gammes gotcommunities with 500.000 members and anything pre2008 usually end up with less than a hundred.
They are not keeping an entire market afloat. they are keeping afload a small part of the market that is heavily specialized to these people needs. nothing wrong with that at all. but does not mean they are the majority.

TomLikesGuitar:
Anyone else think he makes a valid point?

careful, you will be attacked by people who "researched classic gaming" because apperently old games are the thing that keeps gaming market afloat.

Capcha: Yes, this is dog
Yeah.... capcha seems to be samrter than all of us with its messages.....

I love backwards compatibility as much as the next person, but statistically what he is saying is probably accurate, and from a business perspective it makes sense not to include something most of your customers aren't going to us.

However, he shouldn't have said what he said. It will make people angry, and it's always a dumb thing to make people angry. He should have just said "we couldn't afford it", and then that would have been the end of it.

You know Microsoft... My Television may be only 3 months old, but I can still watch black and white movies from the 1950's on it. Just something to remember since you seem to be trying to out-tv the TV.

Strazdas:
zippasnip

Classic gaming is part of the used gaming biz, ergo because companies invest quite a bit of attention into it, you are wrong.

Oh, and the naming isn't anything particular. Others go Strazzy because of the Z, I go Straddy because of the D. No big deal.

FalloutJack:

Strazdas:
zippasnip

Classic gaming is part of the used gaming biz, ergo because companies invest quite a bit of attention into it, you are wrong.

Oh, and the naming isn't anything particular. Others go Strazzy because of the Z, I go Straddy because of the D. No big deal.

so part of a industry that is part of an industry. Also what kind of attention did those companies invest, checked how much of their users actually used it?
As long as you dont call me Strazdaz were going to be fine :)

lunam-kardas:
You know Microsoft... My Television may be only 3 months old, but I can still watch black and white movies from the 1950's on it. Just something to remember since you seem to be trying to out-tv the TV.

Really? i would love to see a modern TV that accepts 8mm film as input......

Strazdas:
VOIP

Look, it's very simple, Camel Joe. Classic gaming is used gaming, a sub-category. Why is that a serious topic even when the game may be about a SNES title, for instance? Because - just as an example - the Escapist frowns on talking about emulators and roms, meaning that companies do not like anyone talking about how to get even very old games free. Yeah, this is a thing, just like with the used game resale thing they hate. It's money they don't see. They don't like any means of playing a game where they don't see the cash for it, even though it may be ten years old. Notice how many times Chrono Trigger got re-released? Bam. Guilty. While being in time and space. They still wanna cash in. SO! Are they paying attention? Oh yes.

Strazdas:

Yes, there are stores like that. They take such a small amount of gaming market share most people dont even count them in. PS2 did sell quite well. HD remakes are same as Hollywood remakes. a nice way to cash in on nostalgia and known names without needing to invent something.
The 3% were actual research i read around half a year ago, the hardcore fans comment i was pulling my of my ass based on what i saw on gaming sites, where new gammes gotcommunities with 500.000 members and anything pre2008 usually end up with less than a hundred.
They are not keeping an entire market afloat. they are keeping afload a small part of the market that is heavily specialized to these people needs. nothing wrong with that at all. but does not mean they are the majority.

I know they make up a small portion of the overall gaming market but I'd still like to know where you're getting these figures considering like used games and piracy it's actually hard to get figures on it. Who the research was done by and why would be nice too. Anyway the point is they might make up a small portion of the overall gaming community but it's still large enough to be profitable. And I wasn't referring to all gaming that's an entire industry, I meant the market for used and old games. It doesn't strike you as even slightly odd that they'll say "Nobody wants backwards compatibility", but still think there's enough demand to just rerelease a shit ton of old games on their online marketplace? What they actually mean is it's really hard to monetise backwards compatibility because if they give us a machine that plays games we already own well then how can they sell those games to us?

I never owned an original Xbox, but I have several games for it which I have played to death on my 360. The main reason that I want the PS4 to be backwards compatible is so that I can play the current gen games that I missed, along with the next gen titles. Since that won't be happening, my plan is to buy a PS3 when the prices drop next year. If I ever buy a next gen system, it won't be for a couple years.

Time to line your PS2 PS3 PS4 xbox 1 360 and xbone up on a shelf just so you can enjoy your games made in the last 13 years.

or you could just build a little ITX based media centre pc and play any game form the last 51 years, last time i checked spacewar still worked on pc.

Aint consoles supposed to be more convenient

Strazdas:

lunam-kardas:
You know Microsoft... My Television may be only 3 months old, but I can still watch black and white movies from the 1950's on it. Just something to remember since you seem to be trying to out-tv the TV.

Really? i would love to see a modern TV that accepts 8mm film as input......

Heh. Yeah I guess I really put my foot in my mouth on that one. My family owns a VHS/DVD converter, which we used to transfer our older format movie collection onto blank DVD's, though the original reason for buying it was to preserve our recorded family moments from the 1990's.

I guess my thought was that I don't think there's a legal gaming equivalent of that converter, something you could use to transfer your older games from their original discs onto something the new consoles will actually attempt to read.

FalloutJack:

Strazdas:
VOIP

Look, it's very simple, Camel Joe. Classic gaming is used gaming, a sub-category. Why is that a serious topic even when the game may be about a SNES title, for instance? Because - just as an example - the Escapist frowns on talking about emulators and roms, meaning that companies do not like anyone talking about how to get even very old games free. Yeah, this is a thing, just like with the used game resale thing they hate. It's money they don't see. They don't like any means of playing a game where they don't see the cash for it, even though it may be ten years old. Notice how many times Chrono Trigger got re-released? Bam. Guilty. While being in time and space. They still wanna cash in. SO! Are they paying attention? Oh yes.

Fair enough.

Spot1990:
[I know they make up a small portion of the overall gaming market but I'd still like to know where you're getting these figures considering like used games and piracy it's actually hard to get figures on it. Who the research was done by and why would be nice too. Anyway the point is they might make up a small portion of the overall gaming community but it's still large enough to be profitable. And I wasn't referring to all gaming that's an entire industry, I meant the market for used and old games. It doesn't strike you as even slightly odd that they'll say "Nobody wants backwards compatibility", but still think there's enough demand to just rerelease a shit ton of old games on their online marketplace? What they actually mean is it's really hard to monetise backwards compatibility because if they give us a machine that plays games we already own well then how can they sell those games to us?

Sorry, i dont remember the couple research (i agree there is too little of it) i read last year that found numbers of 2% and 3%. Of course its large enough to be profitable, else they wouldnt do that. BUt those are specialized stores or people who rip off others (gamestop). a general all-purpose store will hardly bother stocking them now would it.
Thats the thing, people dont want to play those old games, they want to play re-release versions of them, with better graphics and controls. Beside, its not liek they can get money on the old ones anyway. else they would be getting the old games to begin with. There already is a machine that play old games. PC. do gamers move to PC whenever new console comes? nope. SUre, a few do, but the amount is insignificant for them to worry about.
and of course, if you take a part of an industry, than take a part of that and then take a part of that it wont be that small a part, but when compared to whole industry it still is.

MrBenSampson:
I never owned an original Xbox, but I have several games for it which I have played to death on my 360. The main reason that I want the PS4 to be backwards compatible is so that I can play the current gen games that I missed, along with the next gen titles. Since that won't be happening, my plan is to buy a PS3 when the prices drop next year. If I ever buy a next gen system, it won't be for a couple years.

well, PS3 at least has a reason to not be backward compactible, its getting away from the awful processor design in PS3 that hampered programing for it. MS on the other hand are introducing awful processor designs....

alj:
Aint consoles supposed to be more convenient

That kinda died with modern PCs where your OS dont crash every other day.

lunam-kardas:
I guess my thought was that I don't think there's a legal gaming equivalent of that converter, something you could use to transfer your older games from their original discs onto something the new consoles will actually attempt to read.

There isnt, and yep thats a problem on its own. There are illegal converters, though apperently cant talk about them on this forum either. yay for freedom of speech?

Capcha: unlimited wishes.....
oh, you....

In all honesty, after playing GameCube games on my Wii suddenly corrupted one of my memory cards, I now play games specifically on their intended consoles. THAT BEING SAID, it's stupid to just ASSUME that not many people care about backwards compatibility.

No.
My PS1 hasn't been used in at least three years. In those three years I've gotten a working PS2 then a PS3.
The only reasons I still use my original Xbox are because my saves are on the hard drive and the emulation on the 360 is horrific.

Microsoft.
Lemme level with you for a second.
You are very, very stupid.
Stop trying to make profound statements. They are wrong.

It kinda makes me sad to think that after the Halo franchise made them so much money the new Xbox wont be able to play any of them.

Or that Minecraft, which xbox finally got, wont be around on it. Along with a few hundred dollars worth of other arcade games I probably own.

I don't believe this man has ever looked inside a PC or knows that his company will provide extended support for Windows XP into 2014.

Does anyone still recall that the original Backwards Compatible PS3's are the most valuable ones to date?

Idiots.

The_Darkness:
Hoo boy...

Take the Wii. Now, it was a less than brilliant console with regards to its library (I was much happier with the Xbox 360's selection) but that seems to be Nintendo's running problem. However, it did backwards compatibility properly. I can play Eternal Darkness on it. I can play Second Sight on it. I can play Star Wars: Clone Wars on it. But I can also play Super Smash Bros Brawl and Metroid Prime Trilogy on it. And I still do play all of these games. The Wii's somewhat lacklustre library was bolstered by its predecessor, and I didn't have to worry about wanting for games when I first bought it.

Of course, I've already been put off the Xbox One (What was wrong with Xbox Infinity? I know that's a minor complaint, but really?), so this hardly matters here. But Backwards Compatibility is definitely not a bad thing, and definitely not backwards.

Ah yes, but the difference with the Wii is that the hardware inside it is exactly the same as the Gamecube, but overclocked. BC was a no-brainer... in fact, Nintendo would have had to actually do some work in order to make it not backwards compatible!! LOL.

I personally think the PS2 was so successful was because you could play PS1 games on it. It's annoying to have multiple big boxes lying around (especially with peripherals like Kinect) and constantly having to switch between them in order to play different games.

Imagine is Microsoft took this stance with Windows: "Sorry, you can't use that program on Windows 7. It was only programmed for Windows XP. Looks like you'll have to buy the newest version..."

DoctorImpossible:

TelHybrid:

DoctorImpossible:

How simple is it when your old system burns out and they aren't in production anymore?

Then you have the first world problem of either repairing it or replacing it (just because it's no longer in production doesn't mean there wont be loads floating about).

Or just switch to PC gaming and avoid all this crap. :)

This entire discussion is a first-world problem, please don't be so dismissive. Telling someone "EBAY LOL" doesn't address the issue of expensive game collections being rendered obsolete in less than a decade because the manufacturers can't be arsed to provide some basic level of support. This isn't like transitioning from cassettes to compact discs.

I'm not saying BC isn't an issue for console makers, but "just keep your old console" is not a very good solution.

Okay trolling aside I get your point that it's not the best solution.

I must ask though, how is this not like transitioning from cassettes to CDs? Just because the new consoles can read the discs of current gen doesn't mean it can understand the data. Moving from Cell processor or Power PC to X86-64 means that backwards compatibility can only be accomplished by 2 means:

1. Hardware - Literally putting the processor from the previous console iteration into the new console, thus making it bulkier, more expensive to produce, and essentially the same end result as keeping your old console.

2. Emulation - I doubt emulating games for cell processor on x86-64 is even possible especially with PS4's hardware, and X360's Power PC architecture wouldn't be much easier. I've seen high end i7 PCs struggle to emulate the Nintendo Wii! Heck even PS2 emulation hasn't been achieved very well.

Remember when everyone was complaining about not being able to play their NES games on their SNES? No? me neither...

Ignorant statement from an ignorant man.

I guess I'll just throw away my old collection of movies too, since watching them would make me look so "backwards".

TelHybrid:

1. Hardware - Literally putting the processor from the previous console iteration into the new console, thus making it bulkier, more expensive to produce, and essentially the same end result as keeping your old console.

2. Emulation - I doubt emulating games for cell processor on x86-64 is even possible especially with PS4's hardware, and X360's Power PC architecture wouldn't be much easier. I've seen high end i7 PCs struggle to emulate the Nintendo Wii! Heck even PS2 emulation hasn't been achieved very well.

Remember when everyone was complaining about not being able to play their NES games on their SNES? No? me neither...

Just because things always sucked doesn't make it any more acceptable that they continue to suck, we just conform ourselves to it.

Spending resources creating a console that's backwards compatible would be much more respectful to gaming culture than including a button for social networking on your controller.

faspxina:

TelHybrid:

1. Hardware - Literally putting the processor from the previous console iteration into the new console, thus making it bulkier, more expensive to produce, and essentially the same end result as keeping your old console.

2. Emulation - I doubt emulating games for cell processor on x86-64 is even possible especially with PS4's hardware, and X360's Power PC architecture wouldn't be much easier. I've seen high end i7 PCs struggle to emulate the Nintendo Wii! Heck even PS2 emulation hasn't been achieved very well.

Remember when everyone was complaining about not being able to play their NES games on their SNES? No? me neither...

Just because things always sucked doesn't make it any more acceptable that they continue to suck, we just conform ourselves to it.

Spending resources creating a console that's backwards compatible would be much more respectful to gaming culture than including a button for social networking on your controller.

Oh I love the sense of self entitlement I see on these forums. Always makes me smile.

I guess next all of our blu-ray players should be compatible with video cassettes.

I get it. It sucks that there's a lack of backwards compatibility. It's inconvenient. I also get that the statement by the Microsoft Executive is really ignorant and a bad PR move.

Implementing BC just is not feasible. You know how I said that it would increase costs of production? Due to time spent either coding the appropriate emulator or adding additional hardware. Consoles are already sold at a loss upon release. It would be absolutely stupid for a business to then cut their profits further. They would most likely need to charge more for the console.

Remember the last time a company tried this? Sony's Playstation 3 1st release. $600. Look how well that did.

And what would it accomplish? to run a bunch of games that are no longer in production.

Seriously, never start up your own business. You'll end up financially screwed.

TelHybrid:

faspxina:

TelHybrid:

1. Hardware - Literally putting the processor from the previous console iteration into the new console, thus making it bulkier, more expensive to produce, and essentially the same end result as keeping your old console.

2. Emulation - I doubt emulating games for cell processor on x86-64 is even possible especially with PS4's hardware, and X360's Power PC architecture wouldn't be much easier. I've seen high end i7 PCs struggle to emulate the Nintendo Wii! Heck even PS2 emulation hasn't been achieved very well.

Remember when everyone was complaining about not being able to play their NES games on their SNES? No? me neither...

Just because things always sucked doesn't make it any more acceptable that they continue to suck, we just conform ourselves to it.

Spending resources creating a console that's backwards compatible would be much more respectful to gaming culture than including a button for social networking on your controller.

Oh I love the sense of self entitlement I see on these forums. Always makes me smile.

I guess next all of our blu-ray players should be compatible with video cassettes.

I get it. It sucks that there's a lack of backwards compatibility. It's inconvenient. I also get that the statement by the Microsoft Executive is really ignorant and a bad PR move.

Implementing BC just is not feasible. You know how I said that it would increase costs of production? Due to time spent either coding the appropriate emulator or adding additional hardware. Consoles are already sold at a loss upon release. It would be absolutely stupid for a business to then cut their profits further. They would most likely need to charge more for the console.

Remember the last time a company tried this? Sony's Playstation 3 1st release. $600. Look how well that did.

And what would it accomplish? to run a bunch of games that are no longer in production.

Seriously, never start up your own business. You'll end up financially screwed.

Actually, the last company to do this was Nintendo with the WiiU. Also with the Wii. WiiU is selling about as well as the PS360 was at WiiU's age, and Wii outsold them both.

Anyway, backwards compatibility has no effect in the LONG TERM. After a console builds up a decent library there's no reason to want to play old games. In the SHORT TERM, however, a console has few to no good games and so it's a good idea to allow BC, so people have games to play. Case in point, I have exactly ONE WiiU game, but I still bought the WiiU because there are plenty of Wii games I wanted to play. Anyway, it's Sony's own fault that the costs were so high for changing up the Hardware so much every generation. Same thing with MS. If Nintendo could do it, why can't the other two?

suntt123:

TelHybrid:

faspxina:

Just because things always sucked doesn't make it any more acceptable that they continue to suck, we just conform ourselves to it.

Spending resources creating a console that's backwards compatible would be much more respectful to gaming culture than including a button for social networking on your controller.

Oh I love the sense of self entitlement I see on these forums. Always makes me smile.

I guess next all of our blu-ray players should be compatible with video cassettes.

I get it. It sucks that there's a lack of backwards compatibility. It's inconvenient. I also get that the statement by the Microsoft Executive is really ignorant and a bad PR move.

Implementing BC just is not feasible. You know how I said that it would increase costs of production? Due to time spent either coding the appropriate emulator or adding additional hardware. Consoles are already sold at a loss upon release. It would be absolutely stupid for a business to then cut their profits further. They would most likely need to charge more for the console.

Remember the last time a company tried this? Sony's Playstation 3 1st release. $600. Look how well that did.

And what would it accomplish? to run a bunch of games that are no longer in production.

Seriously, never start up your own business. You'll end up financially screwed.

Actually, the last company to do this was Nintendo with the WiiU. Also with the Wii. WiiU is selling about as well as the PS360 was at WiiU's age, and Wii outsold them both.

Anyway, backwards compatibility has no effect in the LONG TERM. After a console builds up a decent library there's no reason to want to play old games. In the SHORT TERM, however, a console has few to no good games and so it's a good idea to allow BC, so people have games to play. Case in point, I have exactly ONE WiiU game, but I still bought the WiiU because there are plenty of Wii games I wanted to play. Anyway, it's Sony's own fault that the costs were so high for changing up the Hardware so much every generation. Same thing with MS. If Nintendo could do it, why can't the other two?

Because Nintendo has such dated last generation hardware that it's much easier to emulate. That's why!

TelHybrid:

suntt123:

TelHybrid:

Oh I love the sense of self entitlement I see on these forums. Always makes me smile.

I guess next all of our blu-ray players should be compatible with video cassettes.

I get it. It sucks that there's a lack of backwards compatibility. It's inconvenient. I also get that the statement by the Microsoft Executive is really ignorant and a bad PR move.

Implementing BC just is not feasible. You know how I said that it would increase costs of production? Due to time spent either coding the appropriate emulator or adding additional hardware. Consoles are already sold at a loss upon release. It would be absolutely stupid for a business to then cut their profits further. They would most likely need to charge more for the console.

Remember the last time a company tried this? Sony's Playstation 3 1st release. $600. Look how well that did.

And what would it accomplish? to run a bunch of games that are no longer in production.

Seriously, never start up your own business. You'll end up financially screwed.

Actually, the last company to do this was Nintendo with the WiiU. Also with the Wii. WiiU is selling about as well as the PS360 was at WiiU's age, and Wii outsold them both.

Anyway, backwards compatibility has no effect in the LONG TERM. After a console builds up a decent library there's no reason to want to play old games. In the SHORT TERM, however, a console has few to no good games and so it's a good idea to allow BC, so people have games to play. Case in point, I have exactly ONE WiiU game, but I still bought the WiiU because there are plenty of Wii games I wanted to play. Anyway, it's Sony's own fault that the costs were so high for changing up the Hardware so much every generation. Same thing with MS. If Nintendo could do it, why can't the other two?

Because Nintendo has such dated last generation hardware that it's much easier to emulate. That's why!

Why is it that using 'dated hardware' allows for more features? Why is it that 'dated hardware' allows for better profitability for no discernible drawback?

Why is it that current hardware costs more up front and requires a subscription in order to do what 'dated hardware' does?

Look, my point is that while BC for PS4 would probably be cost ineffective for SONY, the fact that it can and has been done both successfully and effectively shows us that you don't have to charge $600 for a console that is BC AND is capable of offering additional features. So, why couldn't Sony?

ANSWER:
BECAUSE THEY'RE TOO BUSY KEEPING UP WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, EVEN IF IT ENDS UP COSTING THEM MORE THAN IT MAKES.

While I agree that BC isn't a big deal (in the long run), it would definitely be a plus, especially in a new console's early life when there are few games to be had.

Still, Sony did promise something along the vein of an online store with old gen games. Guess they'll have to capitalize on that. The games better not be full price though -_-

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here