Mishimaryu
Banned
I hope it does I still have good games for them.
Is Xbox 2 going to have backward compatibility?
- Thread starter Mishimaryu
- Start date
MadChedar0
CAGiversary!
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Ok...this will take a while to say...Microsoft recently bought a company that makes emulating software (vitualPC etc.)...They are planning to put that software to use on Xboxnext or whatever you want to call it...So it will in a sense be "backwards compatible" but It will not be compatible with everything...Like XBL will not work on XB2...The new xbox runs on a different processor and chip format and therfor cannot run the old xbox games...Unlike PS3 which runs on the same as PS2 and PS1...I dont see the need in it being backwards compatible...for the system to be as powerful as is possible then you cant run on old formating...hense PS2 and its Jaggies...Did you cry because SNES wasnt backwards compatible with NES? no...you prolly kept both...and thats what ill be doing...Backwards compatibility only shows how weak your upgrades in hardware are...(i look in disgust at PS2)
[quote name='karmapolice620'].Backwards compatibility only shows how weak your upgrades in hardware are...(i look in disgust at PS2)[/quote]
youre saying ps2's hardware is only slightly better than ps1?
look at metal gear solid, one of the best looking ps games.
now look at ffx, one of the best looking ps2 games
notice a diffrence?
youre saying ps2's hardware is only slightly better than ps1?
look at metal gear solid, one of the best looking ps games.
now look at ffx, one of the best looking ps2 games
notice a diffrence?
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
You talking CG scenes or actual gameplay?...If your talking In-game...I think FFX is only a bit above
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Yeah...I dont see why everyone one is getting their panties in a bunch because the new consoles may not be backwards compatible...I mean...let me make a list:
SNES-NO
N64-NO
GameCube-NO
Saturn-NO
Dreamcast-NO
So just because big old SONY makes it backwards compatible it has to be...or else you wont buy it?...that seems REAL stupid to me...
P.S. Yes I know Atari was backwards compatible but im talking consoles that didnt use blobs as characters
SNES-NO
N64-NO
GameCube-NO
Saturn-NO
Dreamcast-NO
So just because big old SONY makes it backwards compatible it has to be...or else you wont buy it?...that seems REAL stupid to me...
P.S. Yes I know Atari was backwards compatible but im talking consoles that didnt use blobs as characters
Mr Unoriginal
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 111 (100%)
[quote name='karmapolice620']Yeah...I dont see why everyone one is getting their panties in a bunch because the new consoles may not be backwards compatible...I mean...let me make a list:
SNES-NO
N64-NO
GameCube-NO
Saturn-NO
Dreamcast-NO
So just because big old SONY makes it backwards compatible it has to be...or else you wont buy it?...that seems REAL stupid to me...
P.S. Yes I know Atari was backwards compatible but im talking consoles that didnt use blobs as characters[/quote]
While I don't think that backwards compatibility will make or break any console, both GBA and PS2 were backwards compatible and are amazingly successful systems...
SNES-NO
N64-NO
GameCube-NO
Saturn-NO
Dreamcast-NO
So just because big old SONY makes it backwards compatible it has to be...or else you wont buy it?...that seems REAL stupid to me...
P.S. Yes I know Atari was backwards compatible but im talking consoles that didnt use blobs as characters[/quote]
While I don't think that backwards compatibility will make or break any console, both GBA and PS2 were backwards compatible and are amazingly successful systems...
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
Yes but GBA nor PS2 had a drastic change...Look at DS...thats a major change and its not backwards compatible...and no its not...it has another port for gba games and has a if you will "little gba" running...Its not all one
Mr Unoriginal
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 111 (100%)
[quote name='karmapolice620']Yes but GBA nor PS2 had a drastic change...Look at DS...thats a major change and its not backwards compatible...and no its not...it has another port for gba games and has a if you will "little gba" running...Its not all one[/quote]
You honestly don't think that GBA had a drastic change over GBC? Or PS2 over PS1?
You honestly don't think that GBA had a drastic change over GBC? Or PS2 over PS1?
CaseyRyback
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 131 (100%)
PS2 games look way better than any PS1 games. There is a huge difference.
go to IGN and look at the difference in the MGS screens. They are comparable since the game uses the PS2 engine and tell me you do not see a drastic difference.
go to IGN and look at the difference in the MGS screens. They are comparable since the game uses the PS2 engine and tell me you do not see a drastic difference.
i could care less if the next ms console washes my frickin car, odds are i wont buy it, based on the fact that their 1st party games are pathetic and have very weak 3rd party support (imo worse than nintendo)
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games
[quote name='CaseyRyback']PS2 games look way better than any PS1 games. There is a huge difference.
go to IGN and look at the difference in the MGS screens. They are comparable since the game uses the PS2 engine and tell me you do not see a drastic difference.[/quote]
fanboys can only see what they wish to ^^
go to IGN and look at the difference in the MGS screens. They are comparable since the game uses the PS2 engine and tell me you do not see a drastic difference.[/quote]
fanboys can only see what they wish to ^^
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
No...gba made a little jump but it wasnt too big...and ps2 also made a little jump...You may differ from my opinion but thats my opinion...I mean gba still cant handle SNES...and to me thats sad...even game gear could play genesis games (with the adapter) but it could handle it
[quote name='karmapolice620']You talking CG scenes or actual gameplay?...If your talking In-game...I think FFX is only a bit above[/quote]
You, sir, are delusional. Look between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 2, I think you'll see quite a huge difference. And then realize that FFX pushes about as many if not more polygons than MGS2.
Also, just as a side note, you can end sentences with one period instead of three every now and again.
Backwards compatibility makes many people feel more comfortable about upgrading hardware. However, since it looks like Microsoft will be working with ATI for its XboxNext chipset, it would need to have quite a bit of hardware to emulate the nVidia specific features of the original Xbox. And, after loosing out on a contract to produce XboxNext chips, I doubt nVidia will be too helpful in making this happen.
Additionally, they are talking about whether or not a harddrive will even be on the XboxNext. Without that, it would be very difficult to makeold Xbox games that used the HD work on the machine.
You, sir, are delusional. Look between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 2, I think you'll see quite a huge difference. And then realize that FFX pushes about as many if not more polygons than MGS2.
Also, just as a side note, you can end sentences with one period instead of three every now and again.
Backwards compatibility makes many people feel more comfortable about upgrading hardware. However, since it looks like Microsoft will be working with ATI for its XboxNext chipset, it would need to have quite a bit of hardware to emulate the nVidia specific features of the original Xbox. And, after loosing out on a contract to produce XboxNext chips, I doubt nVidia will be too helpful in making this happen.
Additionally, they are talking about whether or not a harddrive will even be on the XboxNext. Without that, it would be very difficult to makeold Xbox games that used the HD work on the machine.
[quote name='karmapolice620']No...gba made a little jump but it wasnt too big...and ps2 also made a little jump...You may differ from my opinion but thats my opinion...I mean gba still cant handle SNES...and to me thats sad...even game gear could play genesis games (with the adapter) but it could handle it[/quote]
gb and gba games are so far apart its not even comparable. thats not an opinion, thats a fact.
gba cant handle snes games DIRECTLY because its DIFFRENT hardware, it IS NOT an snes. so games have to be ported. and they often are, flawlessly, if not better
game gear could NOT play genesis games. gamegear could play master system games, and nomad could play genesis games...BECAUSE IT WAS A GENESIS!
gb and gba games are so far apart its not even comparable. thats not an opinion, thats a fact.
gba cant handle snes games DIRECTLY because its DIFFRENT hardware, it IS NOT an snes. so games have to be ported. and they often are, flawlessly, if not better
game gear could NOT play genesis games. gamegear could play master system games, and nomad could play genesis games...BECAUSE IT WAS A GENESIS!
karmapolice
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
They are supposed to be making a memory card that will act as a hard-drive but wont cost MS as much to make...(haha three)...deal with three periods...thats how I like to type...It looks like my thought is more continued than just halted to a stop.
[quote name='karmapolice620']I mean gba still cant handle SNES[/quote]
You're wrong. GBA can't handle SNES quality graphics? For games where you can accurately make a direct comparison, look at Legend of Zelda: LttP on GBA. Or either of the Metroids.
[quote name='karmapolice620']even game gear could play genesis games (with the adapter) but it could handle it[/quote]
You're also wrong. GameGear had an adapter for Master System games, which weren't exactly graphically impressive. The Nomad played Genesis games, but that was a different console all together.
You're wrong. GBA can't handle SNES quality graphics? For games where you can accurately make a direct comparison, look at Legend of Zelda: LttP on GBA. Or either of the Metroids.
[quote name='karmapolice620']even game gear could play genesis games (with the adapter) but it could handle it[/quote]
You're also wrong. GameGear had an adapter for Master System games, which weren't exactly graphically impressive. The Nomad played Genesis games, but that was a different console all together.
[quote name='karmapolice620']and ps2 also made a little jump...You may differ from my opinion but thats my opinion[/quote]
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"
[quote name='alongx'][quote name='karmapolice620']and ps2 also made a little jump...You may differ from my opinion but thats my opinion[/quote]
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"[/quote]
vf4
tekken 3
maybe...a little better ^^
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"[/quote]
vf4
tekken 3
maybe...a little better ^^
SneakyPenguin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 38 (100%)
Oh C'mon, I can't tell the difference!
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='alongx'][quote name='karmapolice620']and ps2 also made a little jump...You may differ from my opinion but thats my opinion[/quote]
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"[/quote]
vf4
tekken 3
maybe...a little better ^^[/quote]
Yah but the ps1 obviosly runs games at 1024x768 instead of 320 x 240 lol way better than ps2.
The original PlayStation could push between 250,000 and 350,000 polygons per second. The PlayStation2 has been quoted to push as much as 66 million polygons per second (by Sega, when talking about Virtua Fighter 4). That is a fact. The only opinion is whether you consider an increase of about 65.6 million polygons processes per second as a "big jump" or a "little jump"[/quote]
vf4
tekken 3
maybe...a little better ^^[/quote]
Yah but the ps1 obviosly runs games at 1024x768 instead of 320 x 240 lol way better than ps2.
[quote name='punqsux']i could care less if the next ms console washes my frickin car, odds are i wont buy it, based on the fact that their 1st party games are pathetic and have very weak 3rd party support (imo worse than nintendo)
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games[/quote]
I don't think anyone one game has been more important to a systems survival then Halo. I honestly believe the X-box would be sharing a grave with the dreamcast if it wasn't for Halo
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games[/quote]
I don't think anyone one game has been more important to a systems survival then Halo. I honestly believe the X-box would be sharing a grave with the dreamcast if it wasn't for Halo
[quote name='jlarlee'][quote name='punqsux']i could care less if the next ms console washes my frickin car, odds are i wont buy it, based on the fact that their 1st party games are pathetic and have very weak 3rd party support (imo worse than nintendo)
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games[/quote]
I don't think anyone one game has been more important to a systems survival then Halo. I honestly believe the X-box would be sharing a grave with the dreamcast if it wasn't for Halo[/quote]
well duh
ps3 will be backwards, and it will be nice being able to play my collection of over 300 ps1+2 games in it
nintendos prolly wont, and thats fine, whatever, ill still buy it, if not ONLY for nintendos games[/quote]
I don't think anyone one game has been more important to a systems survival then Halo. I honestly believe the X-box would be sharing a grave with the dreamcast if it wasn't for Halo[/quote]
well duh
k
SneakyPenguin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 38 (100%)
Dual PWNs to the pirate!
Monsta Mack
CAGiversary!
My main concern with XBox2 not being backwards would be
1) All the live games would go to waste. I have over a dozen XBox live enabled games, and with XBox2 not being backwards and/or not supporting the old live games they would most likely go to waste. MS can either keep the servers up or re-release the XBox live games (the popular ones atleast) at a budget price for XBox2 and this would solve the problem. True Fantasy Live is supposed to be coming out for the XBox, but if the XBox 2 doesn't go backwards does that mean we all have to keep our XBox1's running? What about about the live fees? Will they work for old and new?
2) What if my old XBox dies, or in the long run XBox's don't have a great harddrive life span? I would hate to see all my KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden or any other game that doesn't allow copying to memory units, go to waste.
3) When the XBox 2 will launch, how many games where will there be at the start? 20? With backwards compatibility that offers the entire XBox 1 libary to start. Considering this is cheapassgamer, my home and pride, you can tell must of us are not into spending $300 on launch games AND purchasing the system and accessories. We would like to save a buck or two.
I guess that would be it. If XBox 2 were backwards and had some sort of way to transfer harddrive data between systems (for the big save games) and was able to play all of the older live games then I would be set. I think the least MS can do is re-release the XBox 1 live titles for XBox 2 at a budget price.
1) All the live games would go to waste. I have over a dozen XBox live enabled games, and with XBox2 not being backwards and/or not supporting the old live games they would most likely go to waste. MS can either keep the servers up or re-release the XBox live games (the popular ones atleast) at a budget price for XBox2 and this would solve the problem. True Fantasy Live is supposed to be coming out for the XBox, but if the XBox 2 doesn't go backwards does that mean we all have to keep our XBox1's running? What about about the live fees? Will they work for old and new?
2) What if my old XBox dies, or in the long run XBox's don't have a great harddrive life span? I would hate to see all my KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden or any other game that doesn't allow copying to memory units, go to waste.
3) When the XBox 2 will launch, how many games where will there be at the start? 20? With backwards compatibility that offers the entire XBox 1 libary to start. Considering this is cheapassgamer, my home and pride, you can tell must of us are not into spending $300 on launch games AND purchasing the system and accessories. We would like to save a buck or two.
I guess that would be it. If XBox 2 were backwards and had some sort of way to transfer harddrive data between systems (for the big save games) and was able to play all of the older live games then I would be set. I think the least MS can do is re-release the XBox 1 live titles for XBox 2 at a budget price.
[quote name='Monsta Mack']My main concern with XBox2 not being backwards would be
1) All the live games would go to waste. I have over a dozen XBox live enabled games, and with XBox2 not being backwards and/or not supporting the old live games they would most likely go to waste. MS can either keep the servers up or re-release the XBox live games (the popular ones atleast) at a budget price for XBox2 and this would solve the problem. True Fantasy Live is supposed to be coming out for the XBox, but if the XBox 2 doesn't go backwards does that mean we all have to keep our XBox1's running? What about about the live fees? Will they work for old and new?
2) What if my old XBox dies, or in the long run XBox's don't have a great harddrive life span? I would hate to see all my KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden or any other game that doesn't allow copying to memory units, go to waste.
3) When the XBox 2 will launch, how many games where will there be at the start? 20? With backwards compatibility that offers the entire XBox 1 libary to start. Considering this is cheapassgamer, my home and pride, you can tell must of us are not into spending $300 on launch games AND purchasing the system and accessories. We would like to save a buck or two.
I guess that would be it. If XBox 2 were backwards and had some sort of way to transfer harddrive data between systems (for the big save games) and was able to play all of the older live games then I would be set. I think the least MS can do is re-release the XBox 1 live titles for XBox 2 at a budget price.[/quote]
Hard Drives hardly ever die. They die withen the first few months or they pretty much run forever
1) All the live games would go to waste. I have over a dozen XBox live enabled games, and with XBox2 not being backwards and/or not supporting the old live games they would most likely go to waste. MS can either keep the servers up or re-release the XBox live games (the popular ones atleast) at a budget price for XBox2 and this would solve the problem. True Fantasy Live is supposed to be coming out for the XBox, but if the XBox 2 doesn't go backwards does that mean we all have to keep our XBox1's running? What about about the live fees? Will they work for old and new?
2) What if my old XBox dies, or in the long run XBox's don't have a great harddrive life span? I would hate to see all my KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden or any other game that doesn't allow copying to memory units, go to waste.
3) When the XBox 2 will launch, how many games where will there be at the start? 20? With backwards compatibility that offers the entire XBox 1 libary to start. Considering this is cheapassgamer, my home and pride, you can tell must of us are not into spending $300 on launch games AND purchasing the system and accessories. We would like to save a buck or two.
I guess that would be it. If XBox 2 were backwards and had some sort of way to transfer harddrive data between systems (for the big save games) and was able to play all of the older live games then I would be set. I think the least MS can do is re-release the XBox 1 live titles for XBox 2 at a budget price.[/quote]
Hard Drives hardly ever die. They die withen the first few months or they pretty much run forever
bread's done