X360 compatibility list released - some SW games missing

I was gonna get a 360 for the same reason as you R_W. I can't really see the Original X-box system prospering after the 360 comes in. Its much like what Sony tried to do with the original playstation. Its gets redundant. I was gonna get the 360 to play games like battlefront and RC since i dont have a good computer or the money to upgrade. I will still end up getting it but my enthusiasm has declined somewhat

 

Same here, I'm a bit bummed on that myself. There's no way they can get to number one if they don't make them all compatible. Backward's compatiblity was one of the things that helped Sony get into the posistion it's in.

 

[/quote]

I say why couldn't they just make all Xbox games compatible? If Sony could do it with a larger technology leap from PS to PS2 why can't Microsoft do it?[/quote]

Well from the looks of the list the older games are the ones that are making the list. If you notice the sports games only reach 2004, and some original titles are on there while it's sequels are not. This leads me to a few theories. One, the newer releases are harder to emulate or two the newer title are the ones people are still interested in so they want the XBox Live Traffic/or many "S&H" Fees.

 

I can't believe Battlefront II isn't out for the 360. Well that makes my decision on XBox or PS3. Sorry Microsoft.

 

I just read the Q&A on xbox.com about backwards compatability. Holy carp is Microsoft stupid about this. To play Xbox games on a 360 you have to download an emulator off xbox live, burn a CD off TOXWS or pay to have a CD shipped to you. Well I don't have broadband and therefore I won't be getting live which means I either have to pay to have a disc sent or sit online for hours waiting for a download.

This is frickin' stupid. PS2 had a an easy, user-friendly backwards compatabilty setup. This is a huge set backwards and I hope there is a large industry backlash at Microsoft for being such idiots.

 

my suggestion is to wait till the new sequels come out. I want Battlefront II, but i'll probably wait for Battlefront III (inevitable i beleive) and Halo 3 to come out on the 360. Just wait for the new versions of the games to make it out.

 

You know I wonder why the XBOX EXCLUSIVES did not make the list. You know games that are only on XBOX & PC

I have

Advent Rising
Far Cry Instincts
The Chronicles Of Riddick

That are NOT on the list

Ticks me off

 

Keep the old X Box to play the older games, and just buy the Core System to play the newer games. Plus, you have to buy an additional hard drive to save any of the newer games, or pay for entire package, if you want to play online.

Micrsoft's online gaming is going to get hurt with all of these changes.

 

I can. They probably will come out with an XBOX 360 disc that includes both games that you'd have to buy separately.

 

Wow that's kinda depressing. Maybe the 360 isn't all that after all.

It sounded to me like it would be the clossest step to playing with Jesus himself/end all be all answer to everyone's problems.

 

So many great games not on the list...

No Burnout series, Morrowind, NFL Fever, Mechassualt, Splinter Cell series, and much, much more...

But WTH? It's compatible with Barbie? Horse Adventures? Wild Horse Rescue??? Yourself!Fitness???? Catwoman???? I mean, come on!

 

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard of Microsoft doing.

Sony managed to build an incredibly useful feature into their PS2 that would allow their existing customers to play their old PS1 games on the new console just as easily as playing the new PS2 games. Main reason I never went with the PS2 was that it was about half a generation behind GC and XBox in terms of technology/capabilities. But clearly, Sony made a very shrewd move in making the PS2 backwards-compatible for their existing customer base.

So now, Microsoft makes an attempt at backwards compatibility with their new XBox 360... except they've clearly blown it. Rather than simply making a console which easily runs old XBox games in addition to new 360 games, they've got this ponderous, convoluted mess of a scheme going where they choose what XBox games will or will not be compatible with the 360, and then you still apparently have to download some emulator program or another just to get the selected XBox games to run. Good idea... come up with what's supposed to be a cool, useful feature, and turn it into a bunch of hoops for customers to have to jump through just to get a half-assed attempt at what was originally a great idea.

As opposed to the more or less "plug and play" nature of the PS2 backwards compatibility system.

Why does Microsoft insist on making things such an unnecessary hassle?

 

I remember reading somewhere that MS just recently negotiated with Nvidia about emulating their GeForce graphics chip. They wouldn't have had much time to craft a universal emulator. So the current list might simply be those that were able to run emulated on the 360. A first run list of games.

Also, cross platform games might be easier to run on 'generic' emuation software, because they don't dig too deep into Xbox specific features (see below).

I think later in a console's life, programmers become better adept at creating software for it. This might mean games that access the Xbox at a much 'deeper' hardware level. Or games that use programming tricks to get around a console's shortcomings. Such games might require greater tweaking and refinement of the emulation software. This could explain why many recent games, and exclusive titles, aren't on the list.

Newer consoles have moving parts that will eventually break down. It is nice to know that this generation's fun games will (hopefully) be playable for another 5-10 years on a new generation of consoles.

Microsoft announced backwards compatibility around this year's E3. E3 was also where Sony announced PS3 would play all previous PlayStation games. Nintendo also announced old NES/SNES/N64 games would be downloadable to Revolution. I'm guessing Microsoft tried to hold off committing to Xbox1 emulation, because of the time, money, and programming involved. As well as possible licensing fees to Nvidia, Intel, and other component manufacturers. Only when the other two players made it a marketing issue did MS feel the heat to offer a similar feature.

Backwards compatibility seems to have become an important, appreciated feature with the launches of the Game Boy Color (1998) PS2 (2000), and Game Boy Advance (2001). Now Sony and Nintendo are pledging compatibility with their huge game libraries; 10 and 20 years old, respectively. It seemed odd that Microsoft couldn't/wouldn't do the same with their 3.5 year old console, regardless of how many players will use it for Xbox1 games. Checkbox feature, marketing feature, useful feature. It's become something players now expect from console makers.

As for me, I still enjoy playing old arcade & NES games, as my comments in this thread attest to.

danielc56

 

Well, it's kinda hard to hold M$ accountable for backwards compatibility issues by comparing it to the PS1/PS2 when even Sony seems to be having difficulties maintaining backwards comaptibility with the PS3.

That is probably a side effect of Sony switching to Blu-ray for the PS3. But I have little doubt they will make the PS3 capable of playing all PS2 games at launch without having to download or order something. Esp. after they see what people think of Microsoft's folly.

 

Well, it's kinda hard to hold M$ accountable for backwards compatibility issues by comparing it to the PS1/PS2 when even Sony seems to be having difficulties maintaining backwards comaptibility with the PS3.

Not saying they shouldn't be held accountable for this silly scheme, just that holding it up against Sony is probably not a good example.

Well, the thing is, Microsoft has had how many years to work this out? Their consoles are built around a hard drive (or, were at least, until they decided that they'd make their customers run out and buy one for an extra hundred beans when they release their 360) and that would seem to offer a great deal more latitude when it comes to determining what sort of functionality a console is going to have.

And it's not so much a matter of "Sony did it, why can't Microschnutz?" as it is a matter of "Why make your customers jump through one unnecessary hoop after another just to purchase and make use of your product?"

This goes right along with the fact that once you spend the 300 bucks or whatever the 360 is supposed to go for, you've got to spend another $100 just for the damned hard drive (unless you don't want to do basic things like save games, use XBox Live, or make use of the limited backwards compatibility option), THEN apparently download additional software to make it possible to use the backwards compatability feature that you just spent a hundred extra bucks for the privilege of using, on top of a $300 console?

Oh, but apparently the thing will allow you to view digital video and photos straight out of the box. Can't save a game, but you can sure make everyone sit and watch you project photos from your parents' vacation in Branson. Because isn't that, after all, what the hardcore gamer really wants out of a gaming console?

I'm sorry, but the whole scheme is just hinky as hell and it really doesn't seem like it needed to be. It's definitely got me turned off of even thinking about picking up a 360 for a year or two until the prices start coming down for the complete console. Actually, it's got me thinking of ditching the console concept altogether and just souping up my computer for gaming... and I can't stand hunching over a keyboard to play a vid game. But at this point, it seems preferable to dinkin' around with jumping through all the hoops we're apparently expected to jump through to get a functional XBox 360.

IMHO it's a damned shame that they've bunged the thing up like this, really.

 

I'm right with ya there, man. I'd certainly appreciate the hell out of the convenience of the backwards compatibility of the XBox 360... if not for the fact that it's set up so as to be so blinkin' INconvenient.

I mean, I've got plenty of XBox games that are good enough that I know I'll be playing them for years to come. If Microsoft had really gotten their act together with the 360 and weren't requiring their customers to make modifications to the out-of-the-box 360 console just to take advantage of what appears to be a fairly limited backwards compatibility feature in the first place, I'd probably be looking to buy one within the next several months. But between that and the other problems with not being able to save games unless you shell out for a hard drive or a memory chip, I just don't feel like bothering with it.

 

Jedi Academy is on the list,but what about Jedi Outcast?

 

They got to add Jedi Outcast.

 

If I had an Xbox I'd also be annoyed at the lack of saved game compatability.

I'd rather be able to change systems and pick up where I left off than change systems and go, "Oooh, look at the pretty graphical updates."

But don't wait for Madden or Burnout--those are 99% guaranteed to never be added to the list. Why? Because Madden's got a 360 version for launch, and Burnout's coming in early 2006. No way will EA let people play the older, less expensive, but more feature-rich (for Madden, at least) games. With the caveat that if people raise enough of a stink, they might do it.

In most cases, you can figure out the reason for a game not being on the list...i.e., why let gamers play Doom 3 when Quake 4 can be bought? I mean, they are pretty much the same engine, right? So if Q4 is coded for the 360, an emulator shouldn't be that much more work.

The real puzzlers are Battlefront II and the Splinter Cell games.

 

The biggest reason why I'm dissapointed about the compatibility list is that most of the games I have for the XBox aren't on that list and my XBox is dieing - now it always get a dirty disc thing/it hangs once in a while - it just really distracts from the gameplay. I was hopping for the 360 to have a good list so I can enjoy these games again without having to worry about these issues. But I'm probably going to end up getting an XBox 360 anyways.

 

Take a look at this.

X-Box 360 FAQ

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it looks like ALL X-Box games will work on 360.

EDIT: Nevermind. I didn't read the rest of the questions before posting this. Disregard the n00b Mod.

 

Well, my XBox died an ugly death. And I've been waiting for the 360 to just play the games. Now it looks like I might have to wait until Microsoft makes the machine completely backwards compatible? Unless I want to waste another 160 bucks for an XBox 1.

EnriqueH

 

Unless I want to waste another 160 bucks for an XBox 1.

Give it six months or so after 360 comes out, and I bet you'll be able to pick up a new XBox for under a hundred bucks. My own XBox has been making some pretty damned odd "Well, THAT Doesn't Sound At All Good!" noises lately, and I'm pretty sure I'll end up needing to replace it within the next six months or so... which I will likely do rather than buying a 360. If the 360 were fully backwards-compatable, rather than being some chunk of **** where the Microschnutz marketing twits wore out their abaci bean-counting up which games ought to be back-compatable and which ought not, then perhaps I'd pick up the new system and keep playing my favorite old games on that.

Unfortunately, MS is making a virtually useless pseudo-back-compatable system in this new console, and there's no real reason for me to waste my money on it. So, I reckon it'll be a new XBox from me later next year sometime.