Peter Moore on BC - "Nobody's concerened anymore..."

[quote name='Brak']Moore's right.[/quote]

Obviously he's not. If he was then there woulden't be people complaining right now.

I would only consider getting a 360 if there was backword compatability. I'm not interested in the 360 games but it would be nice for a new system to support my old library. I loved BC on the PS2.

Also, if Microsoft promised they should deliver.
 
Sounds more like Microsoft overpromised and underdelivered.

Saying, "C'mon guys, you'd knew this would happen" is bullshit. I bought my 360 knowing over a hundred games were BC compatible, and they were working on more. Seven months later 15 or so titles were added.

Saying "nobody cares" is also PR bullshit. In these forums, already 50 people care. I bet a good percentage of 360 owener care.
 
the thing is, mainstream gamers are not going to care about this. for those who are interst in the xbox probably already own one. The only losers are the CAG who are waiting for the X360 to have 100% BC, and MS knows very well they are small in number.
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']Someone explain to me the logic behind spending 300-400 bucks on a system to play games which you have been playing on another system for years?[/QUOTE]

Well, seeing as how the Xbox is bigger than the 360... I wouldn't mind having it out of the way.;-)

I don't care to have the entire Xbox library backwards compatible with the 360 but when they shit like Yourself Fitness, The Terminator, Drake but not PD Orta or Otogi 1/2 (three of the finest Xbox games IMO) I have to say WTF is up with that MS?
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']Someone explain to me the logic behind spending 300-400 bucks on a system to play games which you have been playing on another system for years?[/quote]

I doubt that anyone buys a new system solely to play old games. It's nice to be able to play older games while waiting for AAA titles like Halo 3 (and the big titles may be all they want). At least that way a person won't feel like they paid $400 for a paperweight.

Besides, it isn't much different from expecting Win98 and ME games to play correctly on a WinXP system. I won't even mention DOS games.

The problem is that if you say you are going to do BC either do it right or not at all that way people won't trade their systems in and have to buy them again.
 
[quote name='rallen']Saying, "C'mon guys, you'd knew this would happen" is bullshit.[/QUOTE]

It's only bullshit to those of you who bought into the bullshit itself and now feel like you got burned. I stand by my original argument. If you didn't pay attention to the signs that BC would be near impossible then you have no one to blame but yourself. Ok, MS should shoulder some blame but it was YOUR responsibility to be an informed consumer.
 
If you thought they were gonna keep working on old stuff this late in the game = :lol:

Think foward, not backward.
 
Isn't Moore a marketing guy? Does he even know what the backwards compatibility team is up to?

I hope we see more games, but if not I'm at least comforted knowing the hackers will figure it out at some point. :)
 
[quote name='daphatty']It's only bullshit to those of you who bought into the bullshit itself and now feel like you got burned. I stand by my original argument. If you didn't pay attention to the signs that BC would be near impossible then you have no one to blame but yourself. Ok, MS should shoulder some blame but it was YOUR responsibility to be an informed consumer.[/QUOTE]

by 'informed consumer' you mean 'skeptic,' correct? Or, perhaps, 'one who knows that MS would rescind their promise to make all titles BC'?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']by 'informed consumer' you mean 'skeptic,' correct? Or, perhaps, 'one who knows that MS would rescind their promise to make all titles BC'?[/quote]

Or one that knows it's surprising that Microsoft put out as many BC games as they did.
 
Eh, honestly I bet most 360 buyers only care if they can play Halo/Halo 2 and the three GTAs until Halo 3 and GTAIV come out anyway.
 
It wasn't necessarily a huge decision in my eventual buying of a 360 since I haven't thrown out any system I've ever owned as of yet, but the extra space would have been nice.

Oh well. When the initial list was uninspiring and the follow-ups had only a few important, worthwhile XBox titles on there it seemed fairly unlikely that anything major was going to happen unless a massive update was in order. Here's hoping that the team can at least pop out a few more quality titles onto the BC list before giving up.
 
[quote name='daphatty']It's only bullshit to those of you who bought into the bullshit itself and now feel like you got burned. I stand by my original argument. If you didn't pay attention to the signs that BC would be near impossible then you have no one to blame but yourself. Ok, MS should shoulder some blame but it was YOUR responsibility to be an informed consumer.[/QUOTE]

I empathize with your point, but actually MS shoulders nearly all the blame. There's 2 big holes in your argument. One is that you said "near impossible", meaning it actually is possible to make every game (or at least the vast majority) of original xbox titles playable on the 360 even with different processors. Granted some games have emulation glitches, but at least you can play them. MS really just decided to quit on the project (or maybe planned to all along), I don't think it really had anything to do with it being "impossible", impractial, but not impossible. The second hole is that they basically lied to their consumers. We were told there'd the most popular titles available for BC... untrue. We we told there'd be regular updates... untrue. Finally we were told that after they had sometime to work on it nearly every game would be BC, that no seems untrue as well (did they even make through half?).

So to say we should've seen it coming and shoulder alot of blame when it was technically possible and we were told they were doing it is not enirely fair.
 
I was hoping they would at least make a few more games BC before deciding to drop it. Looks like the only way to play Shenmue II now is back on the old Xbox.
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']Someone explain to me the logic behind spending 300-400 bucks on a system to play games which you have been playing on another system for years?[/QUOTE]

It makes sence if you've spend over $500 in games, for your old system, that is about to take a dump on you.
 
past the sports games, everything should be compatitible. All the platnium hits should be compatitible, really no excuse for them to not be on the list unless it's something like MK:D. Also what about a major game coming out like MK:A? I'm gonna get a 360 eventually, but they should at least focus on making the newer major titles work because that's a lot of missed sales.
Regardless of what Moore says, even a more casual gamer would perhaps pick up a game on XBOX they missed and remembered.
Also is there any 2-d games on that list? Those should of probably been in the first batch.
 
Whoever says BC is not important, and is only a gimmick. Go play some of your favorite Xbox games (the ones that are compatible) in high definition with full anti-aliasing and get back to me.

Halo 2, which I thought couldn't get any better: did.

It's not my main focus, but there are still a couple Xbox games I bought in sales and never got around to playing. Or games I'd love to replay in high-def. Sure, 360 games are going to be what I will play most, but backwards compatibility is still very important.
 
I'd probably be pissed off if I actually played Xbox games anymore. Fortunately, I've had my fun with most of the good ones, and there sure as shit not a whole slew of new ones coming.
 
I find it funny how many people in here are arguing that BC is no big deal. In all honesty, it isn't. I'll give everyone this point. If you really want to play the games, you can get an Xbox. But, as many have pointed out, this isn't the point.

They promised to attempt to get Every Xbox Game to work on the 360. Now, giving up a year into the systems life doesn't sound like a strong attempt. It also ticks me off when Moore says he over delivered. No you didn't, you underdelivered, don't rip me off and then say I should be thrilled by it.

Now, I haven't bought a 360 yet, so this isn't a huge deal to me. I still want to get one. But, what if MS just came out and said that no new games would work with their wireless controller that many gamers have. So, even though you expected it to work with future games, oh well. Then, they came out and said, hey 100 games work with the controller, we overdelivered on our promise. Plus, Obvlion works with it, and that's the only game anyone cares about anyway.

If this happened, there would be outrage. Same here.

It'll make me take any "promises" MS makes with their systems with a grain of salt, until they deliver.
 
[quote name='lordxixor101']No you didn't, you underdelivered, don't rip me off and then say I should be thrilled by it.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. I am reminded of a quote from Mr. Show: "Dont shit in my mouth and call it a sunday."

For Moore to say that they "overdelivered" is complete and total BS.
 
I don't hold any ill will towards Microsoft as I thought backwards compatibility could be a joke, but it'll definitely be something I consider when the next round of systems come out and I have the option of buying a game for Sony or Nintendo's system. Hell, I don't even have a PS2 right now, but I'm starting to think about getting PS2 games over Xbox games for whenever I do because of backwards compatibility.

And I think that's ultimately why Microsoft should care. When you have two competitors out there and one that is clearly ahead of you (Sony) they might want to make sure there system isn't lacking a feature the other has. Especially one that I'm sure isn't all that costly as far as resources goes.

Also, is there anything about emulating on the 360 that makes it harder than computer emulation? Everyone talks about the different processors, but that doesn't seem to be a problem on computer emulators. Is it just that the 360 isn't enough of an increase in power over the xbox as say my computer over a ps1 or is there something in the design that's different?
 
Not a big deal to me. I'm glad they are improving the 360 experience with the improved dashboard features, not to mention other stuff they are working on, rather than wasting time with games that are fully playable on another system. If you want the Xbox experience keep your Xbox.
 
"Backward-compatibility is not the reason people buy a new system," said David Hufford, Microsoft Xbox group product manager. "The perception is that it is significant. We've put all our energy into new titles, but since our consumers have asked for it...we've made it a goal to make all titles backward-compatible."

Original Microsoft quote.
 
[quote name='Rozz']"Backward-compatibility is not the reason people buy a new system," said David Hufford, Microsoft Xbox group product manager. "The perception is that it is significant. We've put all our energy into new titles, but since our consumers have asked for it...we've made it a goal to make all titles backward-compatible."

Original Microsoft quote.[/quote]

Yep. That is my whole point. Saying something like that without following through can erode the brand loyalty they were trying to build.
 
[quote name='Rozz']"..we've made it a goal to make all titles backward-compatible."

Original Microsoft quote.[/quote]

Taking one person at msft saying that it is a goal to have all titles b/c and it becomes gospel. So that statement rules out the other ones they had made about b/c. Numerous times, it was reported that B/C would not happen. It was then reported numerous times that B/C would only be for top selling xbox games. Otogi and psychaunauts were not top selling games. Yes they were great, but far from top selling. I still haven't read how reliable the interviews site was. The interview was setup rather shitty, and I question on how reliable there info is.
 
I have had my 360 since launch and do you know how many times I wanted to play an Original XBOX game in it? ZERO. Why, because my original XBOX (A launch XBOX with the Thompson Drive), is on the shelf right below it. 100% BC for me. Now I understand the anger for those who traded theirs in for a 360, but eventually the original XBOX will be cut to $50 and you can pick one up. BC issue resolved.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']Taking one person at msft saying that it is a goal to have all titles b/c and it becomes gospel.[/quote]
He's not the only one who gave the impression that their goals were to make every game BC.

Numerous times, it was reported that B/C would not happen.
Click to expand...
The only times that was "reported" were way before launch, when they hadn't even made an announcement one way or another.

It was then reported numerous times that B/C would only be for top selling xbox games.
Click to expand...
This is the one I tend to look at the most as legitimate, because it was their E3 announcement. However, when you take in combination with the multiple "we want to have every game eventually" follow-up statements, it paints a pretty strong picture to the potential consumer...especially because there are several poorly-selling titles on there and several top-selling titles missing.



THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS DEBATABLE. Microsoft absolutely deceived the customers about this. Personal feelings about backwards compatibility are only half the problem here. The fact that we were lied to is just as notable here. There ARE a large percentage of gamers who feel backwards compatibility is important, and want to see this BC promise all the way through (at least to a reasonable conclusion, not the shoddy-ass "effort" they've made so far).

But don't take my word for it.

To those who are annoyed with this - keep loading those BC games into your 360. If big brother is really watching maybe they'll get the picture. But I doubt it.
 
email them...they appeared to have listened to games people wanted in the spring b/c update, and the improvements on the dashboard in the upcoming update are things the community wanted.
 
kane you took a poll from a gaming website. I find it hard to believe the majority of 360 owners are avid readers of gaming websites.
 
The fact is that BC was NOT going to happen at the beginning, MS realized the marketing they could get with it, started it up, said that their goal was to get the big name Xbox games on the BC list, then that shot up to the goal of having every game BC. Problem is, with the new system that the 360 runs off of, it was VERY hard to develop the emulation software to get all of the older Xbox titles (big and small) to work correctly on the 360. Now they are faced with a dilemna: do you focus mainly on getting these old and forgotten games on this next gen system (that - most likely - less than 1/3 of the 360 owners actually care about) or do you continue on with patches, updates, and newer, better games to compete with the other next gen systems? If they focused mainly on these old games, there would be a majority of people upset about dashboard updates, Marketplace updates, patches for games, and the like. Either way they choose will cause some sort of backlash, and they chose the path with less damage. Unfortunately that hurts a lot of people on this site, but, in general, CAGs are a minority. You never know, maybe after the PS3 tanks then they will have a chance to finish what they started with BC. But, for right now, they are saying that the future of next gen is more important than the past. Do you guys not agree? With you rather play Shenmue II on the 360 or Halo 3, a new Splinter Cell, Street Fighter II, Dead Rising, FEAR, Unreal Tournament, etc.?

Point is, Microsoft didn't hand you a ticket or piece of paper or print some large picture on the back of each box promising BC on every single game..they stated that it was a goal they were aiming for. They failed on that goal (at least for now). That doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't care for it's customers, it doesn't mean they only care about money, and it doesn't mean they are liars.


[quote name='KaneRobot']
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS DEBATABLE.[/quote]
The numerous pages on this already say otherwise :)


[quote name='KaneRobot']
But don't take my word for it.
[/quote] I can bet you that most of the people voting for that are like CAGs and that they vote purely for the fact of shoving it back at MS (because of what Moore said), you won't see the general population of 360 owners vote in that poll. And half of the comments I looked at were talking about DS, Gamecube, or Wii systems.
 
Peter Moore on BC: "We already have your money, only some internet dorks remember our promises, and people who don't have a 360 are only looking to the future. Screw you guys, I'm going home"
 
[quote name='Roufuss']and people who don't have a 360 are only looking to the future.[/quote]


Uhh??? It seems (especially on here) that only people WITH 360s care about the future games more than the old (or don't care at all).
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']Uhh??? It seems (especially on here) that only people WITH 360s care about the future games more than the old (or don't care at all).[/QUOTE]

I'm saying that people who don't have a 360 and are interested in buying one are only looking to see what future 360 games are coming out that appeal to them, and they aren't looking to see what Xbox games are BC when making their decision.

They are buying a 360 for the 360 games (present and future), not because of BC, generally.
 
as others have already said, I knew something like this would happen.

either they would add a small amount of titles here and there, or just wait until people get fed up and not care. I bought an Xbox 1 a whole lot later than most people did, so there are a lot of games out there I've yet to try. I'd forgive them if they threw Panzer Dragoon and Mercenaries on that BC list :)
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']The fact is that BC was NOT going to happen at the beginning, MS realized the marketing they could get with it, started it up, said that their goal was to get the big name Xbox games on the BC list, then that shot up to the goal of having every game BC. Problem is, with the new system that the 360 runs off of, it was VERY hard to develop the emulation software to get all of the older Xbox titles (big and small) to work correctly on the 360. Now they are faced with a dilemna: do you focus mainly on getting these old and forgotten games on this next gen system (that - most likely - less than 1/3 of the 360 owners actually care about) or do you continue on with patches, updates, and newer, better games to compete with the other next gen systems? If they focused mainly on these old games, there would be a majority of people upset about dashboard updates, Marketplace updates, patches for games, and the like. Either way they choose will cause some sort of backlash, and they chose the path with less damage. Unfortunately that hurts a lot of people on this site, but, in general, CAGs are a minority. You never know, maybe after the PS3 tanks then they will have a chance to finish what they started with BC. But, for right now, they are saying that the future of next gen is more important than the past. Do you guys not agree? With you rather play Shenmue II on the 360 or Halo 3, a new Splinter Cell, Street Fighter II, Dead Rising, FEAR, Unreal Tournament, etc.?
[/quote]

Wow, just wow... How long have you played video games? BC has nothing, I repeat nothing to do with us getting a new splinter Cell, FEAR, Dead Rising, or even Halo 3. There's something in the gaming industry called developers, see they make the games. And guess what... The team working on BC (if there even was one) is not anyway that i'm aware of effected by developers working for other copanies or even one like Bungie working for MS. It's a totally different group of people. They may seek some development materials from others, but hardly anything that would hold another company back. As for Live updates, I'm not sure the same team is responsible (I don't think they are though), but even so they could hire more people for the task if need be. Bottomline is BC doesn't take a toll on other departments or companies like you seem to think it does.

[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
Point is, Microsoft didn't hand you a ticket or piece of paper or print some large picture on the back of each box promising BC on every single game..they stated that it was a goal they were aiming for. They failed on that goal (at least for now). That doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't care for it's customers, it doesn't mean they only care about money, and it doesn't mean they are liars.
[/quote]

Now you are just being dense. Last I checked telling your consumers one thing and then half a year later coming out and saying something to the contrary is lying to them. Even if they referred to it as only a goal, it was a goal they presented to their consumers and said they'd try to achieve. Now we hear one of their execs say that they "underpromised and overdelivered". Funny usually the promise of something that is later broken gets an apology not a denial of said promise (or goal if you want to call it that the end result is the same). Look at it this way, if I promised to give you $100 in the next say 200 days. Then I only send a total of $20 for a couple weeks, you ask me what's up this and I respond by sayingl I "overdelievered" on my end, you'd probably say I lied and commited mail fraud.


[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']
I can bet you that most of the people voting for that are like CAGs and that they vote purely for the fact of shoving it back at MS (because of what Moore said), you won't see the general population of 360 owners vote in that poll. And half of the comments I looked at were talking about DS, Gamecube, or Wii systems.[/QUOTE]

I could care less about shoving it back in their face, I'd like what I was told was going to happen to actually happen though. To be honest, I would be far less upset had they actually tried, but they did not. They found it easier to give up than make good on thier goals and promises to the consumer. While nothing will come from our bitching about this i'm sure, if you ask a lot of execs what's important for a successful business, at least two responses will be completing your goals and have a client base than trust in you. You're right about one thing though, MS did fail, at both of those things.
 
[quote name='Number83']I have had my 360 since launch and do you know how many times I wanted to play an Original XBOX game in it? ZERO. Why, because my original XBOX (A launch XBOX with the Thompson Drive), is on the shelf right below it. 100% BC for me. Now I understand the anger for those who traded theirs in for a 360, but eventually the original XBOX will be cut to $50 and you can pick one up. BC issue resolved.[/QUOTE]

Sure, but then it's fair to add the price of a current Xbox to that of the 360, when you're choosing between a 360 and a PS3. That fair?

Besides, all you're really arguing is that the people who ALREADY have a 360 don't care about BC. I suspect Microsoft might want to try to sell the console to the people who DON'T have one yet. And considering the evidence indicates that the more hardcore gamers DO care, while the mainstreamers don't, and it's the hardcore who tend to be the early adopters ... well, you want to stay on the good side of the people who make your launch successful.

Further, issues like BC are relevant when people make the choice of which version of multiplatform games to get. The Xbox had the advantage of better hardware, and that let it often narrow the gap in sales with the PS2 and its larger installed base. Now it doesn't have the hardware advantage, so giving up something even as small-seeming as BC ("Hrm. Should I get the version of the game that looks better and I'll be able to give to my grandkids if I so desire, or the slightly less attractive one that could very well be a worthless hunk of plastic in 5 years?") is just stupid, flat out.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']
Now you are just being dense. Last I checked telling your consumers one thing and then half a year later coming out and saying something to the contrary is lying to them. Even if they referred to it as only a goal, it was a goal they presented to their consumers and said they'd try to achieve. Now we hear one of their execs say that they "underpromised and overdelivered". Funny usually the promise of something that is later broken gets an apology not a denial of said promise (or goal if you want to call it that the end result is the same). Look at it this way, if I promised to give you $100 in the next say 200 days. Then I only send a total of $20 for a couple weeks, you ask me what's up this and I respond by sayingl I "overdelievered" on my end, you'd probably say I lied and commited mail fraud.[/QUOTE]

Come on now, they originally said that top-selling games were going to be backward compatible. We ended up with 207 overall to date.

That is actually pretty amazing considering what they had to overcome to emulate original Xbox games on the 360.

Last time I checked, Peter Moore never announced that they they were no longer going to add new games to the list just that it isn't a top-priority anymore. Which is perfectly understandable now that the 360 has been out for 6+ months now.
 
[quote name='Sporadic']Come on now, they originally said that top-selling games were going to be backward compatible. We ended up with 207 overall to date.

That is actually pretty amazing considering what they had to overcome to emulate original Xbox games on the 360.

Last time I checked, Peter Moore never announced that they they were no longer going to add new games to the list just that it isn't a top-priority anymore. Which is perfectly understandable now that the 360 has been out for 6+ months now.[/QUOTE]

Did you even get my point, he's saying they overdelivered to us, which not only inaccruate but just down-right wrong. Speaking of which, of those 207 how many are actually top sellers? Better yet how many are even titles MS has deemed "Platinum Hits"? How many are sequels or operate on the same engine as other games on the list? The answer to the first 2 is "not too many and definately not the majority", the answer to the third is "suprisingly alot". If this was their top priority til now don't you think they could've at least got say maybe 60 new games on there since launch. That's about ten games a month, sure it may be tough, but if it was their top priority then what was stopping them? It sure wasn't lack of capital and they seemed to get a over 150 out by launch time and I doubt that really took anymore than a year (they didn't even talk about BC til right before launch). In reality it never was their top priority, not even close. How many times was the thing even updated, like 3? I don't see how they have overdelivered on their claim now and don't see how they trickle out fewer games at any slower of a pace. Are we going to get only 2 BC games added every 3 months now instead of 4? Awesome I'm totally hyped we'll be getting less, lemme mark my calendar, oh wait that's right the updates are totally random so I can't...
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Did you even get my point, he's saying they overdelivered to us, which not only inaccruate but just down-right wrong. [/QUOTE]

I do get your point, except I agree with him. Going from top-selling games,which many people were guessing (before launch) would only be 30-40, to 207 to date is overdelivering on what they originally said.

[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Speaking of which, of those 207 how many are actually top sellers? Better yet how many are even titles MS has deemed "Platinum Hits"? How many are sequels or operate on the same engine as other games on the list? The answer to the first 2 is "not too many and definately not the majority", the answer to the third is "suprisingly alot".[/QUOTE]

That is because they are emulating the original Xbox hardware. Once you get one working it could open up many others.

[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Did you even get my point, he's saying they overdelivered to us, which not only inaccruate but just down-right wrong. Speaking of which, of those 207 how many are actually top sellers? Better yet how many are even titles MS has deemed "Platinum Hits"? How many are sequels or operate on the same engine as other games on the list? The answer to the first 2 is "not too many and definately not the majority", the answer to the third is "suprisingly alot". If this was their top priority til now don't you think they could've at least got say maybe 60 new games on there since launch. That's about ten games a month, sure it may be tough, but if it was their top priority then what was stopping them? It sure wasn't lack of capital and they seemed to get a over 150 out by launch time and I doubt that really took anymore than a year (they didn't even talk about BC til right before launch). In reality it never was their top priority, not even close. How many times was the thing even updated, like 3? I don't see how they have overdelivered on their claim now and don't see how they trickle out fewer games at any slower of a pace. Are we going to get only 2 BC games added every 3 months now instead of 4? Awesome I'm totally hyped we'll be getting less, lemme mark my calendar, oh wait that's right the updates are totally random so I can't...[/QUOTE]


I don't believe it wasn't their top priority since launch.

Even if it was expecting 10 games a month is a little much.

Once you start digging into the Xbox library the harder it becomes to get other titles working. With new games using tricks to push the Xbox harder then it was suppose to go and some older games using their own engines.

I still think that even getting 200 working is absolutely amazing.
 
fuck you MS! I can't believe you would do this to me! How am I supposed to play my 4 year old games now? This is outrageous for you to not deliver on a goal (not a promise which is what everyone is claiming it to be, but a tough goal that they wanted to try to achieve in a reasonable manner). fuck you! Does MS really expect me to play new games for the system I bought, so that I could play next gen games? That's bullshit!
 
I saw this coming as well, being that I consider myself a PC enthusiast (however, my interest in computing is representative of a small fraction of the total population; therefore, I can understand why many people are shocked by this). Two reasons: the processor (PowerPC), and the change in graphics chipsets (from NVidia to ATI).

However, Microsoft blatantly market BC as a feature of its product. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. It's false advertising at its finest (we promise you this, you get a half ass representation of it). The 360 has been well supported so far with frequent updates and listening to user feedback (as well as recognizing a product defect, and fully repairing and replacing products free of charge- something Sony did not do). Being the large and powerful software manufacturer that it is, it kind of offends me that MS will not devote the resources to fully keep its word.

People say offbeat games like Panzer Dragoon Orta or Otogi sold poorly.. but don't underestimate the power of word of mouth. They may have sold poorly initially, but nominal statistics do not track the sales of Ebay or game retailers to sell used copies (and I sometimes wonder if clearanced games are often included in those statistics, as price points ARE a major influence upon unit sales).

That's another point.. Xbox games are alot cheaper and more accessible as a whole than 360 games with the higher mark-up. It wouldn't surprise me if this decision was partly influenced by a desire on the part of Microsoft to drive up 360 software sales by eliminating internal competition from its older product further down the product life cycle.

I would say read between the lines here. It wasn't just one Microsoft rep. who said BC would be realized, it was the company and its marketing push as a whole. This wasn't some bald douche bag wearing an Xbox lanyard who "inspects" retailers staking this claim, this was the full marketing blitz pre-launch of the console at a prior E3 and in various gaming magazines.

This is another sad case of the end-user getting the shaft, much as many PC gamers feel when they buy a new game and it doesn't work until a patch comes out. Only this time, the shaft doesn't have lube and they kill the hopes for the patch. I bought my 360 with hopes that I could realize the company's claims of "your original Xbox games look and sound better on the 360!"

Is it also not confusing to some that PC games that were ported to the Xbox and fully functional on both ATI and NVidia chipsets for the PC (Doom 3 and Deus Ex: Invisible Wars) can not be emulated on the 360 (unless it's a processor issue)? In this case, although I am definitely not an expert programmer, should require the least of effort. There were claims earlier in the year that Xbox titles would be fully downloadable in the future.. not only does that claim also seem false, but also alienating many great games that may have become inaccessible to gamers due to sales (Orta, Oddworld, etc.).

One poster earlier in the thread said that this opens the way for modding and emulation. I totally agree, as they will bitch and sue in 5 years when we are playing Orta on our PC (or, if Sony has its way, the "supposedly superior to PC's" PS3). It also supports the point that if a company dances the thin line of abandonware or no longer supports a format after abandoning the consumer, where do they have the right to prosecute users for finding their own means to use a product that the manufacturer discontinued and no longer sells for profit?

This sickens me greatly. I understand that some find this a miniscule announcement, but to those who have used this format for years and are left hoping that their console with a historically poor reliability lives on for a few more years are up in arms. It does matter.. it was a selling point that was falsified. This may have been a business decision, but it is one that consumers will likely remember. That $400 white box no longer feels like it was worth the full price, when BC has now become an industry norm.

Some of us can't afford to pay $1000 for 10 game bundles.. some of us actually value the dollar that has to be stretched farther and farther in these times, as inflation grows like a potential gastric bypass patient in a pizza buffet. Some of us like to play games that are good enough to play through more than once (believe it or not, something that the holy grail of game companies- the casual gamer- commonly practices). They planned this all along, and teased us like that hot chick in high school that just wanted a ride home from school and wanted to bum a cigarette.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Wow, just wow... How long have you played video games? BC has nothing, I repeat nothing to do with us getting a new splinter Cell, FEAR, Dead Rising, or even Halo 3. There's something in the gaming industry called developers, see they make the games. And guess what... The team working on BC (if there even was one) is not anyway that i'm aware of effected by developers working for other copanies or even one like Bungie working for MS. It's a totally different group of people. They may seek some development materials from others, but hardly anything that would hold another company back. As for Live updates, I'm not sure the same team is responsible (I don't think they are though), but even so they could hire more people for the task if need be. Bottomline is BC doesn't take a toll on other departments or companies like you seem to think it does.[/quote]
When did I say that Halo 3 comes from the same people who work in BC??? Look at what you're quoting before you click the button and comment on it. The Microsoft team does handle things such as updates (E3 anyone?) and is still the lead in the BC project. What I said was that MICROSOFT had a decision...whether to pursue the company's interest in the past or future. And yes, they do have a say in future games because the developers have to meet some restrictions such as dates in their making of a game. I never said one thing about BC taking tolls on other companies as well, all I was aiming for was to get the point across that MICROSOFT knew it wasn't in their best interests to pursue this ultimate goal of 100% BC because they had new, stiff competition thanks to E3. They know that a dominant percentage of people cared more about how Halo 3, Gears of War, Fable 2, and the new Splinter Cell would compare to Wii and PS3 games MUCH more than trying to compete with the BC that both other systems say they will have. And what you are saying is nothing (I repeat) nothing near to what I said.




[quote name='Duo_Maxwell'] Now you are just being dense. Last I checked telling your consumers one thing and then half a year later coming out and saying something to the contrary is lying to them. Even if they referred to it as only a goal, it was a goal they presented to their consumers and said they'd try to achieve. Now we hear one of their execs say that they "underpromised and overdelivered". Funny usually the promise of something that is later broken gets an apology not a denial of said promise (or goal if you want to call it that the end result is the same). Look at it this way, if I promised to give you $100 in the next say 200 days. Then I only send a total of $20 for a couple weeks, you ask me what's up this and I respond by sayingl I "overdelievered" on my end, you'd probably say I lied and commited mail fraud.[/quote]
Still missing the point..he's referring to the very beginning of this whole deal when at first there would be no BC, but then it was revealed that the top Xbox games would be BC. THAT AND ONLY THAT was a promise. That promise has been pretty well carried out so far (just because you think an Xbox game is one of the best doesn't mean the general population does..which is what MS is most worried about..the majority). The idea of 100% BC was something Moore stated as a goal. It was MS's GOAL to get to 100% BC...big difference. In that sense, which is what Moore means, which is what I mean...they did underpromise (meaning they did not PROMISE every game) and they overdelivered (meaning they gave us more than just the top Xbox games). And mail fraud is a completely different area that has nothing to do with this topic and is a pretty bad example.



[quote name='Duo_Maxwell'] I could care less about shoving it back in their face, I'd like what I was told was going to happen to actually happen though. To be honest, I would be far less upset had they actually tried, but they did not. They found it easier to give up than make good on thier goals and promises to the consumer. While nothing will come from our bitching about this i'm sure, if you ask a lot of execs what's important for a successful business, at least two responses will be completing your goals and have a client base than trust in you. You're right about one thing though, MS did fail, at both of those things.[/quote]
Did I say I bet Duo Maxwell feels that way? No, I said most people probably will (at least most of those who realize that poll is for 360 and not for Nintendo systems). And yes, they did choose to give up on that goal instead of letting it drag on more and more when they know most of the games that people want are represented on the BC list. Also, you failed at yet another comment because I know (personally) that a lot of people trust MS more than ever especially handling their hardware/system questions or needs. They have upped their game in customer support as well as Live support, and, as mentioned by someone earlier, they have even responded to emails about possible games in the BC list and what not. This is one goal they have failed at...ONE. Did they fail at providing a easy to use and good online experience? NO. Did they fail at making games that look better and play better than what was normally put out on Xbox? NO. Did they fail at making a system that any type of gamer can use to their advantage and anyway they wanted? NO. Did they fail at making the Marketplace something that was kept up to date in media and development and entertaining? NO. Did they fail at a goal that was nearly impossible to accomplish right from the get-go? Yes. Man, Microsoft really sucks.
 
[quote name='TheRock88']I was hoping they would at least make a few more games BC before deciding to drop it. Looks like the only way to play Shenmue II now is back on the old Xbox.[/QUOTE]

Um, dreamcast?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top