It is best illustrated with Steam, that even allows you to redownload games you've bought years ago, which they no longer carry. (Just compare that to the money you've thrown at MS over the years.) I have a few games I can right now uninstall and redownload five years from now without a worry in the world.
The lisence I've bought to play those games will forever by mine. (Unless the dev of a specific title pulls the lisences)
Steam is not going anywhere. Not only do they offer the service to us gamers, but they have specific versions for the military and educational institutes for which they offer branch-specific software. Steam is much more than the 'they have the industry in a strangle-hold' company.
The best thing about Steam is that if I upgrade my computer, or even decide to go from Intel/Nvidia to AMD/Ati, I can just redownload my library, complete with all savestates I might have accumulated over the years. (Yes, even those for the games I have uninstalled two years ago.)
When I buy Steam, my money is only wasted by me not researching the game I'm interested in before buying it. It won't be wasted because my computer is brand-locked and my brand decides to go Risk-CPU.
Cryptic, the same goes for 360, so I'm not sure your point. Once you buy a game it's downloadable under your gamertag on any box forever, even if it goes off the marketplace. So......... moot point here. Cloud saves = get your saves anywhere any time too.
It is best illustrated with Steam, that even allows you to redownload games you've bought years ago, which they no longer carry. (Just compare that to the money you've thrown at MS over the years.) I have a few games I can right now uninstall and redownload five years from now without a worry in the world.
The lisence I've bought to play those games will forever by mine. (Unless the dev of a specific title pulls the lisences)
Steam is not going anywhere. Not only do they offer the service to us gamers, but they have specific versions for the military and educational institutes for which they offer branch-specific software. Steam is much more than the 'they have the industry in a strangle-hold' company.
The best thing about Steam is that if I upgrade my computer, or even decide to go from Intel/Nvidia to AMD/Ati, I can just redownload my library, complete with all savestates I might have accumulated over the years. (Yes, even those for the games I have uninstalled two years ago.)
When I buy Steam, my money is only wasted by me not researching the game I'm interested in before buying it. It won't be wasted because my computer is brand-locked and my brand decides to go Risk-CPU.
Cryptic, the same goes for 360, so I'm not sure your point. Once you buy a game it's downloadable under your gamertag on any box forever, even if it goes off the marketplace. So......... moot point here. Cloud saves = get your saves anywhere any time too.
What was that about backwards compatibility again, Shadow? Big no-no, right? Good luck downloading your Arcade titles on the Xbone.
There are four titles in my Arcade download history I can't get anymore.
The cloudservice on Steam existed well before this was possible on the 360.
It is best illustrated with Steam, that even allows you to redownload games you've bought years ago, which they no longer carry. (Just compare that to the money you've thrown at MS over the years.) I have a few games I can right now uninstall and redownload five years from now without a worry in the world.
The lisence I've bought to play those games will forever by mine. (Unless the dev of a specific title pulls the lisences)
Steam is not going anywhere. Not only do they offer the service to us gamers, but they have specific versions for the military and educational institutes for which they offer branch-specific software. Steam is much more than the 'they have the industry in a strangle-hold' company.
The best thing about Steam is that if I upgrade my computer, or even decide to go from Intel/Nvidia to AMD/Ati, I can just redownload my library, complete with all savestates I might have accumulated over the years. (Yes, even those for the games I have uninstalled two years ago.)
When I buy Steam, my money is only wasted by me not researching the game I'm interested in before buying it. It won't be wasted because my computer is brand-locked and my brand decides to go Risk-CPU.
Cryptic, the same goes for 360, so I'm not sure your point. Once you buy a game it's downloadable under your gamertag on any box forever, even if it goes off the marketplace. So......... moot point here. Cloud saves = get your saves anywhere any time too.
What was that about backwards compatibility again, Shadow? Big no-no, right? Good luck downloading your Arcade titles on the Xbone.
There are four titles in my Arcade download history I can't get anymore.
The cloudservice on Steam existed well before this was possible on the 360.
My comment is not with regard to BWC. I/We are talking about ability to re-download titles on the same system you bought them on, which I can do with my account. Duke Nukem 3D is no longer available to buy, but I know I can re-download it if I want to, and so on. The only reason I could see your 4 not being able to be redownloaded is if they were taken down for legal reasons. In which case I'd contact those companies and complain.
Who cares when the cloud service was implemented? It's there now, and we're talking about now.
Ignore my tin foil hat here( Which many others seem to be wearing as well but not been attacked for) ....but can someone more tech savvy please explain to me why backward compatibility is considered so difficult on this new console? Seeing as how it's a windows based system one would think it would be an effortless thing to accomplish. I mean I can take my Sid Meier's Pirates DVD from 2005 out of the box, slide it into my PC and be shivering timbers in no time. How is it that with all the supposed "Processing power" and 3 Operating systems cannot run games made 7 years or even 1 month before it's release?
Again, ignore the conspiracy theory here...but seems like nothing more than a way to sell 360's and their accessories even after launching their new system.
can someone more tech savvy please explain to me why backward compatibility is considered so difficult on this new console?
I am by no means an expert, but this is my understanding as to why from your question:
MS is changing the processor from what it is currently using in the 360. It comes with a different architecture then what the 360 is currently using.
So when you try to put in a 360 game and try to play it on the Xb1, the xb1 reads the disc and it says to play this game go to this area/location/part of the processor (the old one) to run the start up screen. But the new proc is like FU I do not know where that f'ing is so does not compute.
Just because the xbox (or PS for that matter) looks like a comp, does things like a comp, using hardware simular to a comp does not mean it is a comp. A computer is still far advanced in many many ways and I am not talking about gaming graphics power, I am talking comparing everything a comp can do to everything a console can do. Yes it is also true that when you buy a new comp with a different proc you can still do 98% of everthing you could do before, but that is not the case with a console proc. In fact (and I think this is correct) Sony and MS go to microchip manufactuers and ask them to make completely new proc to use in their systems. They just do not roll up to them and say we need 5 million i7 pentium chips (or amd equivelant), conversly you could not log into Newgg.com and order the processor Sony and/or MS will be using for their console to build your own console. They are hardward specific for the Mobo and design for consoles and unless you purchased the specific mobo, obtained the specific OS's, there would be no way a current OS would be able to run on a gaming console proc.
That is the simplified version of what I understand to be the reason. Sorry for shootihg off from the topic a bit.
Now from what I have read here (and other sites) is that people believe this is a NEW issue to a MS console, it is not. The original xbox to 360 transition also had this issue (they also switched the type of processor architecture from the xbox to the 360), the only difference is that MS did a SOFTWARE fix so you could run some (yes not all xbox games could be played on the 360) xbox games on the 360. Over time they continued to add more and more titles you could play because they had people updating the emulating software to run old games. Until they found out that less and less people were using the 360 to play xbox games. This happened in a span of 2 years, until MS said they would not be supporting the original xbox anymore.
Now people maybe asking well why the hell can't they do that with the XB1. Well from one of the articles that was posted, the MS dude said (in PR smoke and mirrors talk) that basically they do not want to put the resources (i.e. money/people power which just comes back to money) into something that is such a big deal for a small percent of console buyers. Yes it might be a big enough deal for lets say 350k people to say..Nope not going to buy your stinking console. Well that numbers is an exceptable loss for them over the span of the life of the XB1. Which they probably calculate down to the last penny to campare dollars thrown at a software emulator/maintence/testing/employess hired/future fixes for emulator that cause problems/etc. compared to PROFIT loss from the X amount of sales lost to people not buying the console due to no BWC.
Azure, please do not take my info above as something specific targeted to you or my attempt to sound snarky. This is the same question/issue I have seen from other people and I am just trying to explain it in the most non teckie/corprate bullshit way that MS or Sony would explain it.
If anyone with a better tech undertanding of it wants to give it a shot or what I said is completely wrong please correct me. I have my big boy pants on and will not roll up in the fetal position.
Azure, please do not take my info above as something specific targeted to you or my attempt to sound snarky. This is the same question/issue I have seen from other people and I am just trying to explain it in the most non teckie/corprate bullshit way that MS or Sony would explain it.
If anyone with a better tech undertanding of it wants to give it a shot or what I said is completely wrong please correct me. I have my big boy pants on and will not roll up in the fetal position.
Hell no man. That's not snarky at all and honestly makes a lot of sense. Contrary to popular opinion, I'm always open to a good debate/conversation but more often then not when I try to engage in one I'm attacked personally and though I shouldn't I usually respond in kind.
I understand that Microsoft thinks that backward compatibility isn't that big of a deal for a lot of people. To me it sounds like a cop out and excuse to squeeze more life out of the former hardware. Honestly, if the new console ran all of the 360 games and used the accessories not only would no one who bought a new console buy another 360 when theirs dies, but the sales of the new accessories would also be affected as we would not have to repurchase [b]everything[/b] over again.
Your arcade library is not tied to your 360, it's tied to your gamertag, which will persist over to Xbox One and back to any future 360 you might buy. This is why I can log in and play on both of my 360's even though I bought some games on one and some on the other. They're on your account, not your 360 box. Also the 360/One's live are the same Live.
Azure, the 360 is not Windows based. It's PowerPC, which is actually its own thing. x86 is Windows based, and that's what the One is going to. It'd be like trying to play Mac OS9 software on OSX Lion (Intel). Won't work, not the same type of OS. You'd have to create an emulater like Parallels to run the game in its own ecosystem, inside of the One's OS - which would take a lot of ridiculous coding and resources. Just look at how long it took for Xbox games to be BWC with the 360. Every quarter they'd release an update that let a few more games work. After awhile they just stopped doing it because it's not worth it. After awhile people are just buying the new system's games anyway, and in the meantime they can keep the old system.
Also, they'd have to include the RF system that the 360 uses alongside the One's WiDi system in order for all of the old controllers to work, too. Eventually it's diminishing returns and then the system after the One would have to have all of those and then the new inputs that the future system would have. You just can't keep adding all old inputs and new ones, or you end up with an overloaded system.
Why should gamers be entitled ot games for infinite number of years? Not all Windows 95 games work on Windows 8. Sometimes technology advances.
I can understand why BWC is a nice feature. However, it's not the end of the world if it isn't included, right? I'm not seeing how it's such a devastatingly huge deal to be honest.
Can someone explain why this is a critical deciding factor?
Reminder: Xbox Live Gold works on both Xbox 360 and Xbox One from the same subscription. Also, it's the same service. If they cut off your 360's live, they cut it off for One. Same servers.
Why should gamers be entitled ot games for infinite number of years? Not all Windows 95 games work on Windows 8. Sometimes technology advances.
It's because I bought them pure and simple, that's why I feel entitled. Also people aren't asking for games from 1981 to work on the XboxOne. They are simply asking for games they bought a few months ago or even a day ago to work on a console being released in November. I really don't think that's a lot to ask of a company that has more money than Zeus. It has been said above that they could make the console backward compatible but don't because they don't think it's cost effective. Yet if we the consumer demanded it, they would have little choice. Just like the used games debate. We all know that they had a plan to make you pay to play used games and kill the rental companies entirely, now they are scrambling to change the policies before E3 so that people will calm down after that reveal.
This is nothing new. Companies have always attempted to invalidate their former tech to force you to buy the newest products. From proprietary screws and ports to laser discs and mini dvds. It's never about it just being better, profit is always the over riding factor. The problem this time however is that we are dealing with a much more ravenous fanbase that will literally suck up anything they offer with a platinum straw.
Microsoft wants to sell another 25 million Xbox 360 consoles. EA is making NEW games for it until 2017. You've got plenty of time to play an arcade game while the console is outdated by several years. They will be sold in stores and easy to find for at least half a decade. It's really, really not a big deal if you want to play Hexic that bad. Just play it! :)
Why is the Xbox 360 not viable to play Xbox 360 games?
Has Microsoft said they are removing the ability for Xbox 360 owners to play Xbox 360 games?
Is an Xbox One required to play Xbox 360 games?
Is there any actual problem besides not getting a neat feature that is not needed?
Don't get me wrong, I would have liked BWC. However, since it is not included, I'll play Xbox 360 games on Xbox 360. I already have the games, system, accessories, etc so I'm good to go. When I buy an Xbox One, I'll play those games on that system. If my Xbox 360 breaks, I'll easily be able to buy a replacement, redownload my purchased games, and still have my accessories for half a decade minimum. Easy peasy.
Only 5-6 months before XB1 comes out. We don't need to wear ourselves out over this now.
The inevitable will happen, whether we like it or not. MS can't change much of anything now no matter what we complain about. Save your allowance money for your next toy, or not.
We went through all of this for the 360 and we got 8 years of service so far and more to come. Why should I not expect something similar for XB1? A few months of inconvenience and then we'll be all settled in, one way or another.
The Xbox 360 is of course viable to play 360 games yet we all know how unreliable/disposable that console is. The problem here is that admitedlly Microsoft could make the 360 games compatable, they just don't feel like it. It's bad enough that the physical discs wont be coming over, but to not allow the arcade games to come over also? That's bordering on criminal...especially considering they are not getting rid of the arcade....just not allowing the games from the 360 to transfer over.
Why should I be forced to maintain a 360 to play my digital library. These games are not on my side, they are on theirs....and the hundreds if not thousands of dollars that someone has put into those games are now tied to a costly console known to fail..meaning simply if your 360 fails....or I should say when it fails your digital library is useless...you know that digital library that is sitting on their servers? Yeah you can't touch it ever again unless of course you buy yet another Xbox 360 that is.
How many HDMI ports are we supposed to have? Not to mention shelf space, because not only are we expected to buy this new massive brick of a console, but also keep our old one too....oh and the collection of accessories for both as well. I mean I know you're for the new box, but even someone as excitied about this new console as you can see why customers may be a tad bit miffed about this.
You're forced to maintain an Xbox 360 to play your digital library today.
They never said they would keep the compatibile for every console for centuries, did they?
They never said they'd keep making consoles either. They are coming out with one more new one, and that's all we know for sure they will do.
If you think they are nearly criminals, perhaps contact a lawyer and find out if you can start a class action lawsuit over this. If you feel this strongly, why not?
I'm guessing he'll tell you they have not deprived you of anything you are able to do today. Nor have they announced any intention to deprive you of it either. They're looking to sell 25 million more Xbox 360s over several years.
Feel free to let us know what legal legs you have to stand on though. I'd be interetsed in seeing what the response to your question is.
You're forced to maintain an Xbox 360 to play your digital library today.
They never said they would keep the compatibile for every console for centuries, did they?
They never said they'd keep making consoles either. They are coming out with one more new one, and that's all we know for sure they will do.
If you think they are nearly criminals, perhaps contact a lawyer and find out if you can start a class action lawsuit over this. If you feel this strongly, why not?
I'm guessing he'll tell you they have not deprived you of anything you are able to do today. Nor have they announced any intention to deprive you of it either. They're looking to sell 25 million more Xbox 360s over several years.
Feel free to let us know what legal legs you have to stand on though. I'd be interetsed in seeing what the response to your question is.
Wow....just wow. Yeah i'll get right on that, right after I ask my physician about that overwhelming urge to be ignorant and sarcastic tick thing you have going on there. I'm sure you've never said something was "borderline criminal" or told someone you would "kill them". Guess they called the cops and you were on trial for attempted murder right? Holy hell.
I'm talking about a company that is going to not port over the digital library you just spent thousands of dollars on even though they are still using the same freaking network. It's not a big trick to make those games available and we all know it. Honestly I can't see why you think having access to those games is so out of the ordinary or excessive. They are bringing over all your achievements for those games...and they will update on both the 360 and XboxOne but they can't make the games run on both systems.
Maybe if they spent less time waving at the Kinect camera to swap between Friends and Dancing with the Stars they would have been able to bring over the Arcade titles.
You're forced to maintain an Xbox 360 to play your digital library today.
They never said they would keep the compatibile for every console for centuries, did they?
They never said they'd keep making consoles either. They are coming out with one more new one, and that's all we know for sure they will do.
If you think they are nearly criminals, perhaps contact a lawyer and find out if you can start a class action lawsuit over this. If you feel this strongly, why not?
I'm guessing he'll tell you they have not deprived you of anything you are able to do today. Nor have they announced any intention to deprive you of it either. They're looking to sell 25 million more Xbox 360s over several years.
Feel free to let us know what legal legs you have to stand on though. I'd be interetsed in seeing what the response to your question is.
Wow....just wow. Yeah i'll get right on that, right after I ask my physician about that overwhelming urge to be ignorant and sarcastic tick thing you have going on there. I'm sure you've never said something was "borderline criminal" or told someone you would "kill them". Guess they called the cops and you were on trial for attempted murder right? Holy hell.
I'm talking about a company that is going to not port over the digital library you just spent thousands of dollars on even though they are still using the same freaking network. It's not a big trick to make those games available and we all know it. Honestly I can't see why you think having access to those games is so out of the ordinary or excessive. They are bringing over all your achievements for those games...and they will update on both the 360 and XboxOne but they can't make the games run on both systems.
Maybe if they spent less time waving at the Kinect camera to swap between Friends and Dancing with the Stars they would have been able to bring over the Arcade titles.
Seriously Azuredreams your only amusing him
Although it may be an idea for everyone to chill or this puppy will be locked
Although it may be an idea for everyone to chill or this puppy will be locked
I recommend it be locked and a new one started after/during E3. At least there will be more info to arg.... discuss. No amount of discussion or discord is going to change the XB1 release anyway.
About the games that can't run on my PC anymore... What in the world is Autarch talking about? Even with the Open Lisence Dosbox I can still play games that are well over 20 years old. No such thing as games not working on PC anymore. Even for games that don't work on W8, you can get community-coded wrap-arounds and still play. And if you can't find those, go to a coding-forum and ask if anyone is interested in writing a wrap-around for game X for your OS.
Other than that, most of the games that don't work anymore and are not community-patched aren't games people would still want to play anyway. Like Barby Horse Adventures.
On the Xbox-front. The absence of BWC, especially for 2o2p people since our community is up to it's eyeballs in the 360 side of things, should be a huge factor. To all good things comes an end, I understand that and I agree with that. However, I have always compared games with books. The good books you'll read again and again, the bad books you keep in your shelves because they look good just sitting there and maybe, just maybe, you get around to reading them and find something in there you didn't find before.
As for developers supporting the 360 once the Xbone is there... don't keep your hopes up. No triple AAA dev will want to code two different versions of the same game for two systems who are fundamentally different. 2014/2015 is what I predict, but after that you'll be playing some lousy shooter coded by a bunch of monkeys while your friends with the Xbone will play the latest and the baddest coded by people who can actually develop games.
The budget for Skyrim was insane. And it was coded specifically for the 360. Anyone who has a PS3 with Skyrim will agree with me when I say that Bethesda didn't even try to make Skyrim even compatible with the PS3 at a basic level. It booted up, but that was it. Now imagine what's going to happen with Fallout 4. It's still early enough for Bethesda to convert what they have to Xbone (If they haven't already), but with the budget they do maintain, it will be all or nothing Xbone.
I do hope that people aren't entertaining the idea that they, say, can play Halo-lite on their 360 and connect with their friends on a Xbone who are playing Halo-heavy.
I do hope that people aren't entertaining the idea that they, say, can play Halo-lite on their 360 and connect with their friends on a Xbone who are playing Halo-heavy.
Halo topic! I'm all over this.
Halo 2 didn't work very well on the 360. Latent images mucking up the screen and map loading issues. Yep, I do not expect the two systems to work well together even if it was tried.
Although there will likley be fewer day one Halo adopters around here, considering their experiences with Halo 4, many Halo fans would still buy XB1 just for a new Halo. I'll hazard they'd do it even for an upgraded Halo 4.
game console are not PCs. They rarely run emulators and if they do it's very limited. Each title would have to be converted and coded to work, and then probably not very well (and you'd be complaining about how not all the features work and there are bugs). The new box is like having a Mac and then buying a PC and being mad you can't use your .dmg's on your PC.
If you bought a SNES at launch, and had bought an NES game the week before but couldn't play it on your SNES - did you call foul? No, because it was a new system and it wasn't expected to work in that. So you kept your NES and played it on that. I guarantee you any TV made in the past 5 years has at least 3-4 HDMI inputs, and if they don't you can get a splitter pretty cheaply.
"We all know that they had a plan to make you pay to play used games and kill the rental companies entirely
No, they're not. They've stated you can play used games, trade and sell them without fee.
I have a feeling there are those in this thread that think MS is in general out to get them and won't trust them no matter what they do - and so find anything they do an excuse to call them thieves and swindlers. If you feel this way, why did you even buy a 360 in the first place? You obviously think they want to screw you and always have..
I agree with Deep. Obviously people aren't reading the TANK thread with all the info we have so far. We should probably lock or even delete this thread and wait for all the official info in a couple weeks.
game console are not PCs. They rarely run emulators and if they do it's very limited. Each title would have to be converted and coded to work, and then probably not very well (and you'd be complaining about how not all the features work and there are bugs). The new box is like having a Mac and then buying a PC and being mad you can't use your .dmg's on your PC.
If you bought a SNES at launch, and had bought an NES game the week before but couldn't play it on your SNES - did you call foul? No, because it was a new system and it wasn't expected to work in that. So you kept your NES and played it on that. I guarantee you any TV made in the past 5 years has at least 3-4 HDMI inputs, and if they don't you can get a splitter pretty cheaply.
"We all know that they had a plan to make you pay to play used games and kill the rental companies entirely
No, they're not. They've stated you can play used games, trade and sell them without fee.
I have a feeling there are those in this thread that think MS is in general out to get them and won't trust them no matter what they do - and so find anything they do an excuse to call them thieves and swindlers. If you feel this way, why did you even buy a 360 in the first place? You obviously think they want to screw you and always have..
I agree with Deep. Obviously people aren't reading the TANK thread with all the info we have so far. We should probably lock or even delete this thread and wait for all the official info in a couple weeks.
Are you saying that you didn't buy the NES-converter? NVM, that was a low blow, even for my standards.
Microsoft is offering Xbox 360 far more support after its new iteration launches than the first Xbox ever had.
Microsoft has not said they are removing anyones ability to play any game on Xbox 360. If you yourself choose not to purchase the ability to play an arcade game should your console break, that is not Microsofts fault.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox 360.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox One.
New video game consoles frequently come with new games and improved graphics. This is nothing new. It is the same as it has been for decades. There should be no surprise.
I still have physical books I reread. I still have old games I replay. Microsoft did not raid my house to steal my Xbox 360 console and games so that I can never play with them.
Sometimes when I watch TV I have an itch and scratch my back. Am I to rage about Microsoft refusing to include a backscratcher with their new console? Have they ever said they were going to include one? Do I have any reason to excpect or demand they include one?
Not trying to offend anyone, but just trying to lay out some thoughts I've had in a clear manner. The amount of rage, hysteria, knee jerk reactions, conspiracy theories, and whining over personal wants I've seen over the past few days across many websites about the Xbox One is saddening and staggering. Forgive me if I come off a bit abrasive at times, but often I am just dumbfounded at the things people say or claim. I'd be fine with this thread being locked and a new one formed after E3. I see no reason for that to be a problem.
Microsoft is offering Xbox 360 far more support after its new iteration launches than the first Xbox ever had.
Microsoft has not said they are removing anyones ability to play any game on Xbox 360. If you yourself choose not to purchase the ability to play an arcade game should your console break, that is not Microsofts fault.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox 360.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox One.
New video game consoles frequently come with new games and improved graphics. This is nothing new. It is the same as it has been for decades. There should be no surprise.
I still have physical books I reread. I still have old games I replay. Microsoft did not raid my house to steal my Xbox 360 console and games so that I can never play with them.
Sometimes when I watch TV I have an itch and scratch my back. Am I to rage about Microsoft refusing to include a backscratcher with their new console? Have they ever said they were going to include one? Do I have any reason to excpect or demand they include one?
Not trying to offend anyone, but just trying to lay out some thoughts I've had in a clear manner. The amount of rage, hysteria, knee jerk reactions, conspiracy theories, and whining over personal wants I've seen over the past few days across many websites about the Xbox One is saddening and staggering. Forgive me if I come off a bit abrasive at times, but often I am just dumbfounded at the things people say or claim. I'd be fine with this thread being locked and a new one formed after E3. I see no reason for that to be a problem.
Personally, I'm all for this thread to remain open, because we're having a discussion. A discussion generally happens between people with differing points of view. I'd be much more in favor for closure of this thread if it was a circle-jerk.
Calling for closure of this thread is telling me that some people aren't getting their way, or feel their viewpoints not being respected and calling for a closure is the last straw to 'win'. You Autarch, are grasping for straws.
What we do know about the Xbone is this:
no BWC
Different architecture
No downloading your Arcade library to the Xbone (no BWC)
Not intended to work next to the 360
New direction for MS, away from gaming to a more rounded family entertainment hub
That does mean something very clear and present for 2o2p at large: Who's going to go Xbone and who's staying 360? What will that mean for clans? Yes, I'm thinking beyond the here and now, and I've been doing that since I joined this thread, which I joined because I still game 360. (<- legit participant)
What will be the wiser choice in the end, PC or Xbone? For many people in the US that will not only mean getting a new system, but also trading up because the pricepoint of the Xbone will probably mean that trading in the old 360 while is worth something makes getting the Xbone realistic. (It's a recession, not everyone can just go out and get a Xbone) For many more it will mean possibly upgrading their Internet. A PC is ultimately a cheaper choice, since it is more versatile and not policed like the Xbone will be. (Systemwide DRM on the Xbone)
Switching to Xbone in my point of view is not a trade up, it's a sacrifice. In games bought, in hardware bought and in arcade titles bought. It will probably mean that clans will splinter into Xbone users and 360 users, at least until everybody has a Xbone. So clans will have to make sacrifices too. If you tender souls already can't handle this thread, what will happen once Xbone gets more ground under it's feet within 2o2p?
I don't think that the E3 will be any deeper than a huge look at what you can do and please gawk at our launch line-up. And a lot of half-dressed japanese girls. Those too.
I was not calling for the thread to be closed, Cat, but saying I didn't have a problem if that happened. I'm fine with it staying open for discussion too. What kind of straw is that, and can I make a hat from it?
Why does buying an Xbox One mean people cannot use their Xbox 360? I'm planning to own both. It does not have to be a one or the other, does it?
No price has been announced officially. Gamestop's CEO has stated that Microsoft told him the price for the console would be LOWER than the cost of the Xbox 360 at its launch. This fits with Microsoft's goals for the console too.
For all we actually know, the Xbox One could cost 50 dollars and come with five free games. It's just as much speculation as any other speculation about price at this point.
And to repeat because it's extremely important - Buying an Xbox One does not mean people can't own an Xbox 360.
I was not calling for the thread to be closed, Cat, but saying I didn't have a problem if that happened. I'm fine with it staying open for discussion too. What kind of straw is that, and can I make a hat from it?
Why does buying an Xbox One mean people cannot use their Xbox 360? I'm planning to own both. It does not have to be a one or the other, does it?
No price has been announced officially. Gamestop's CEO has stated that Microsoft told him the price for the console would be LOWER than the cost of the Xbox 360 at its launch. This fits with Microsoft's goals for the console too.
For all we actually know, the Xbox One could cost 50 dollars and come with five free games. It's just as much speculation as any other speculation about price at this point.
And to repeat because it's extremely important - Buying an Xbox One does not mean people can't own an Xbox 360.
Well, maybe you can rush out and get the Xbone without trading in your old 360 to meet the retail-price.
But I still remember that I paid €550,- to buy my silver-rimmed 360 eight years ago. So, the Xbone will likely sit just above that, make it an even €600. It will be too high, I'm sure. But whatever it will be, it won't be something many people just go and get.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one on disability and I'm not even talking about people who work jobs at places that love to lay off personell when the wind changes. Or people on welfare right now, who are also in 2o2p. Or people working low wages.
You can look solely at your own situation, but we're not the bonavista social club. We're 2o2p. Your friends here are more likely to not be in your position. So whatever you're planning is not relevant. I'm glad that you can do both, more power to you. But for many more of us, trading in to trade up, if only to stay current within their clan (for many reasons, not only to have what they have), will be more to the point.
Sooooooooooo, the Xbone will be a bitter pill to swallow for some. And not because of the expected pricepoint alone, but because the Xbone is MS' new direction, which invalidates the 360. There's no amount of talking around that.
If Microsoft expects people who want the new xbox for the tv and entertianment stuff alone to pay over 500 dollars, or over 600 dollars for it, then yes Microsoft is absolutely nuts. I can't see how that would ever make sense considering their entertainment direction to charge a high price at all. Who would buy a way to talk to the tv for that much money? It's not a way to increase market share at all - and considering Microsoft said they want one of these in every living room it is not the direction Microsoft should take. Considering Gamestop's CEO revealed Microsoft told him it should cost less than a launch Xbox 360, I'll trust his word over random guesswork based on trepidation.
An "expected" price point that is ridiculously high is more a sign of ones feelings about the console and backwards compatibility than a realistic expectation given the targetted markets and the reveal of Gamestops CEO.
I agree, if they charge double the cost of a launch Xbox 360, that is one bitter pill to swallow. I have no expectation whatsoever for it to be anywhere close to that though.
I also agree that trading in a console towards one with the ability to play the previous consoles games is a great feature. The higher the price of the new console, the more attractive that feature can be.
I can't reasonably see Microsoft targetting a market while at the same time putting a price that completely eliminates that market. It does not make any sense to me whatsoever. If they were doing only gaming and not any entertainment, I'd expect a higher price than I do now actually.
Just going but I remember because I was an early adapter for the 180 and the 360 (I was still working high wages back then, fortunes change don't they?) I payed FL450,-- for the 180, for that time a bunch of money only hipster-gamers were prepared to drop on the new system. PS-one was still top-dog. It was about FL175,-- more expensive than the exit-prices of the old consoles.
Granted, I bought the exclusive Xbox back then, the normal grey one was around €450. To help you understand the difference between guilders and the later €, that meant the 360 at launch was arounf FL800,--. Even now, an Arcade is €225, around FL600,--
So this new fangled doodad Xbone, that will do more than the 360 at launch will at no point be cheaper than the 360 was at launch. It will be more expensive. That's not conjecture, that looking at things without rose-tinted glasses on.
Cryptic, the same goes for 360, so I'm not sure your point. Once you buy a game it's downloadable under your gamertag on any box forever, even if it goes off the marketplace. So......... moot point here. Cloud saves = get your saves anywhere any time too.
What was that about backwards compatibility again, Shadow? Big no-no, right? Good luck downloading your Arcade titles on the Xbone.
There are four titles in my Arcade download history I can't get anymore.
The cloudservice on Steam existed well before this was possible on the 360.
My comment is not with regard to BWC. I/We are talking about ability to re-download titles on the same system you bought them on, which I can do with my account. Duke Nukem 3D is no longer available to buy, but I know I can re-download it if I want to, and so on. The only reason I could see your 4 not being able to be redownloaded is if they were taken down for legal reasons. In which case I'd contact those companies and complain.
Who cares when the cloud service was implemented? It's there now, and we're talking about now.
Ignore my tin foil hat here( Which many others seem to be wearing as well but not been attacked for) ....but can someone more tech savvy please explain to me why backward compatibility is considered so difficult on this new console? Seeing as how it's a windows based system one would think it would be an effortless thing to accomplish. I mean I can take my Sid Meier's Pirates DVD from 2005 out of the box, slide it into my PC and be shivering timbers in no time. How is it that with all the supposed "Processing power" and 3 Operating systems cannot run games made 7 years or even 1 month before it's release?
Again, ignore the conspiracy theory here...but seems like nothing more than a way to sell 360's and their accessories even after launching their new system.
I am by no means an expert, but this is my understanding as to why from your question:
MS is changing the processor from what it is currently using in the 360. It comes with a different architecture then what the 360 is currently using.
So when you try to put in a 360 game and try to play it on the Xb1, the xb1 reads the disc and it says to play this game go to this area/location/part of the processor (the old one) to run the start up screen. But the new proc is like FU I do not know where that f'ing is so does not compute.
Just because the xbox (or PS for that matter) looks like a comp, does things like a comp, using hardware simular to a comp does not mean it is a comp. A computer is still far advanced in many many ways and I am not talking about gaming graphics power, I am talking comparing everything a comp can do to everything a console can do. Yes it is also true that when you buy a new comp with a different proc you can still do 98% of everthing you could do before, but that is not the case with a console proc. In fact (and I think this is correct) Sony and MS go to microchip manufactuers and ask them to make completely new proc to use in their systems. They just do not roll up to them and say we need 5 million i7 pentium chips (or amd equivelant), conversly you could not log into Newgg.com and order the processor Sony and/or MS will be using for their console to build your own console. They are hardward specific for the Mobo and design for consoles and unless you purchased the specific mobo, obtained the specific OS's, there would be no way a current OS would be able to run on a gaming console proc.
That is the simplified version of what I understand to be the reason. Sorry for shootihg off from the topic a bit.
Now from what I have read here (and other sites) is that people believe this is a NEW issue to a MS console, it is not. The original xbox to 360 transition also had this issue (they also switched the type of processor architecture from the xbox to the 360), the only difference is that MS did a SOFTWARE fix so you could run some (yes not all xbox games could be played on the 360) xbox games on the 360. Over time they continued to add more and more titles you could play because they had people updating the emulating software to run old games. Until they found out that less and less people were using the 360 to play xbox games. This happened in a span of 2 years, until MS said they would not be supporting the original xbox anymore.
Now people maybe asking well why the hell can't they do that with the XB1. Well from one of the articles that was posted, the MS dude said (in PR smoke and mirrors talk) that basically they do not want to put the resources (i.e. money/people power which just comes back to money) into something that is such a big deal for a small percent of console buyers. Yes it might be a big enough deal for lets say 350k people to say..Nope not going to buy your stinking console. Well that numbers is an exceptable loss for them over the span of the life of the XB1. Which they probably calculate down to the last penny to campare dollars thrown at a software emulator/maintence/testing/employess hired/future fixes for emulator that cause problems/etc. compared to PROFIT loss from the X amount of sales lost to people not buying the console due to no BWC.
Azure, please do not take my info above as something specific targeted to you or my attempt to sound snarky. This is the same question/issue I have seen from other people and I am just trying to explain it in the most non teckie/corprate bullshit way that MS or Sony would explain it.
If anyone with a better tech undertanding of it wants to give it a shot or what I said is completely wrong please correct me. I have my big boy pants on and will not roll up in the fetal position.
Hell no man. That's not snarky at all and honestly makes a lot of sense. Contrary to popular opinion, I'm always open to a good debate/conversation but more often then not when I try to engage in one I'm attacked personally and though I shouldn't I usually respond in kind.
I understand that Microsoft thinks that backward compatibility isn't that big of a deal for a lot of people. To me it sounds like a cop out and excuse to squeeze more life out of the former hardware. Honestly, if the new console ran all of the 360 games and used the accessories not only would no one who bought a new console buy another 360 when theirs dies, but the sales of the new accessories would also be affected as we would not have to repurchase [b]everything[/b] over again.
Your arcade library is not tied to your 360, it's tied to your gamertag, which will persist over to Xbox One and back to any future 360 you might buy. This is why I can log in and play on both of my 360's even though I bought some games on one and some on the other. They're on your account, not your 360 box. Also the 360/One's live are the same Live.
Azure, the 360 is not Windows based. It's PowerPC, which is actually its own thing. x86 is Windows based, and that's what the One is going to. It'd be like trying to play Mac OS9 software on OSX Lion (Intel). Won't work, not the same type of OS. You'd have to create an emulater like Parallels to run the game in its own ecosystem, inside of the One's OS - which would take a lot of ridiculous coding and resources. Just look at how long it took for Xbox games to be BWC with the 360. Every quarter they'd release an update that let a few more games work. After awhile they just stopped doing it because it's not worth it. After awhile people are just buying the new system's games anyway, and in the meantime they can keep the old system.
Also, they'd have to include the RF system that the 360 uses alongside the One's WiDi system in order for all of the old controllers to work, too. Eventually it's diminishing returns and then the system after the One would have to have all of those and then the new inputs that the future system would have. You just can't keep adding all old inputs and new ones, or you end up with an overloaded system.
Why should gamers be entitled ot games for infinite number of years? Not all Windows 95 games work on Windows 8. Sometimes technology advances.
I can understand why BWC is a nice feature. However, it's not the end of the world if it isn't included, right? I'm not seeing how it's such a devastatingly huge deal to be honest.
Can someone explain why this is a critical deciding factor?
Reminder: Xbox Live Gold works on both Xbox 360 and Xbox One from the same subscription. Also, it's the same service. If they cut off your 360's live, they cut it off for One. Same servers.
It's because I bought them pure and simple, that's why I feel entitled. Also people aren't asking for games from 1981 to work on the XboxOne. They are simply asking for games they bought a few months ago or even a day ago to work on a console being released in November. I really don't think that's a lot to ask of a company that has more money than Zeus. It has been said above that they could make the console backward compatible but don't because they don't think it's cost effective. Yet if we the consumer demanded it, they would have little choice. Just like the used games debate. We all know that they had a plan to make you pay to play used games and kill the rental companies entirely, now they are scrambling to change the policies before E3 so that people will calm down after that reveal.
This is nothing new. Companies have always attempted to invalidate their former tech to force you to buy the newest products. From proprietary screws and ports to laser discs and mini dvds. It's never about it just being better, profit is always the over riding factor. The problem this time however is that we are dealing with a much more ravenous fanbase that will literally suck up anything they offer with a platinum straw.
Microsoft wants to sell another 25 million Xbox 360 consoles. EA is making NEW games for it until 2017. You've got plenty of time to play an arcade game while the console is outdated by several years. They will be sold in stores and easy to find for at least half a decade. It's really, really not a big deal if you want to play Hexic that bad. Just play it! :)
Why is the Xbox 360 not viable to play Xbox 360 games?
Has Microsoft said they are removing the ability for Xbox 360 owners to play Xbox 360 games?
Is an Xbox One required to play Xbox 360 games?
Is there any actual problem besides not getting a neat feature that is not needed?
Don't get me wrong, I would have liked BWC. However, since it is not included, I'll play Xbox 360 games on Xbox 360. I already have the games, system, accessories, etc so I'm good to go. When I buy an Xbox One, I'll play those games on that system. If my Xbox 360 breaks, I'll easily be able to buy a replacement, redownload my purchased games, and still have my accessories for half a decade minimum. Easy peasy.
Only 5-6 months before XB1 comes out. We don't need to wear ourselves out over this now.
The inevitable will happen, whether we like it or not. MS can't change much of anything now no matter what we complain about. Save your allowance money for your next toy, or not.
We went through all of this for the 360 and we got 8 years of service so far and more to come. Why should I not expect something similar for XB1? A few months of inconvenience and then we'll be all settled in, one way or another.
The Xbox 360 is of course viable to play 360 games yet we all know how unreliable/disposable that console is. The problem here is that admitedlly Microsoft could make the 360 games compatable, they just don't feel like it. It's bad enough that the physical discs wont be coming over, but to not allow the arcade games to come over also? That's bordering on criminal...especially considering they are not getting rid of the arcade....just not allowing the games from the 360 to transfer over.
Why should I be forced to maintain a 360 to play my digital library. These games are not on my side, they are on theirs....and the hundreds if not thousands of dollars that someone has put into those games are now tied to a costly console known to fail..meaning simply if your 360 fails....or I should say when it fails your digital library is useless...you know that digital library that is sitting on their servers? Yeah you can't touch it ever again unless of course you buy yet another Xbox 360 that is.
How many HDMI ports are we supposed to have? Not to mention shelf space, because not only are we expected to buy this new massive brick of a console, but also keep our old one too....oh and the collection of accessories for both as well. I mean I know you're for the new box, but even someone as excitied about this new console as you can see why customers may be a tad bit miffed about this.
You're forced to maintain an Xbox 360 to play your digital library today.
They never said they would keep the compatibile for every console for centuries, did they?
They never said they'd keep making consoles either. They are coming out with one more new one, and that's all we know for sure they will do.
If you think they are nearly criminals, perhaps contact a lawyer and find out if you can start a class action lawsuit over this. If you feel this strongly, why not?
I'm guessing he'll tell you they have not deprived you of anything you are able to do today. Nor have they announced any intention to deprive you of it either. They're looking to sell 25 million more Xbox 360s over several years.
Feel free to let us know what legal legs you have to stand on though. I'd be interetsed in seeing what the response to your question is.
Wow....just wow. Yeah i'll get right on that, right after I ask my physician about that overwhelming urge to be ignorant and sarcastic tick thing you have going on there. I'm sure you've never said something was "borderline criminal" or told someone you would "kill them". Guess they called the cops and you were on trial for attempted murder right? Holy hell.
I'm talking about a company that is going to not port over the digital library you just spent thousands of dollars on even though they are still using the same freaking network. It's not a big trick to make those games available and we all know it. Honestly I can't see why you think having access to those games is so out of the ordinary or excessive. They are bringing over all your achievements for those games...and they will update on both the 360 and XboxOne but they can't make the games run on both systems.
Maybe if they spent less time waving at the Kinect camera to swap between Friends and Dancing with the Stars they would have been able to bring over the Arcade titles.
Seriously Azuredreams your only amusing him
Although it may be an idea for everyone to chill or this puppy will be locked
About the games that can't run on my PC anymore... What in the world is Autarch talking about? Even with the Open Lisence Dosbox I can still play games that are well over 20 years old. No such thing as games not working on PC anymore. Even for games that don't work on W8, you can get community-coded wrap-arounds and still play. And if you can't find those, go to a coding-forum and ask if anyone is interested in writing a wrap-around for game X for your OS.
Other than that, most of the games that don't work anymore and are not community-patched aren't games people would still want to play anyway. Like Barby Horse Adventures.
On the Xbox-front. The absence of BWC, especially for 2o2p people since our community is up to it's eyeballs in the 360 side of things, should be a huge factor. To all good things comes an end, I understand that and I agree with that. However, I have always compared games with books. The good books you'll read again and again, the bad books you keep in your shelves because they look good just sitting there and maybe, just maybe, you get around to reading them and find something in there you didn't find before.
As for developers supporting the 360 once the Xbone is there... don't keep your hopes up. No triple AAA dev will want to code two different versions of the same game for two systems who are fundamentally different. 2014/2015 is what I predict, but after that you'll be playing some lousy shooter coded by a bunch of monkeys while your friends with the Xbone will play the latest and the baddest coded by people who can actually develop games.
The budget for Skyrim was insane. And it was coded specifically for the 360. Anyone who has a PS3 with Skyrim will agree with me when I say that Bethesda didn't even try to make Skyrim even compatible with the PS3 at a basic level. It booted up, but that was it. Now imagine what's going to happen with Fallout 4. It's still early enough for Bethesda to convert what they have to Xbone (If they haven't already), but with the budget they do maintain, it will be all or nothing Xbone.
I do hope that people aren't entertaining the idea that they, say, can play Halo-lite on their 360 and connect with their friends on a Xbone who are playing Halo-heavy.
Halo 2 didn't work very well on the 360. Latent images mucking up the screen and map loading issues. Yep, I do not expect the two systems to work well together even if it was tried.
Although there will likley be fewer day one Halo adopters around here, considering their experiences with Halo 4, many Halo fans would still buy XB1 just for a new Halo. I'll hazard they'd do it even for an upgraded Halo 4.
Cyptic, Azure, et al......
game console are not PCs. They rarely run emulators and if they do it's very limited. Each title would have to be converted and coded to work, and then probably not very well (and you'd be complaining about how not all the features work and there are bugs). The new box is like having a Mac and then buying a PC and being mad you can't use your .dmg's on your PC.
If you bought a SNES at launch, and had bought an NES game the week before but couldn't play it on your SNES - did you call foul? No, because it was a new system and it wasn't expected to work in that. So you kept your NES and played it on that. I guarantee you any TV made in the past 5 years has at least 3-4 HDMI inputs, and if they don't you can get a splitter pretty cheaply.
"We all know that they had a plan to make you pay to play used games and kill the rental companies entirely
No, they're not. They've stated you can play used games, trade and sell them without fee.
I have a feeling there are those in this thread that think MS is in general out to get them and won't trust them no matter what they do - and so find anything they do an excuse to call them thieves and swindlers. If you feel this way, why did you even buy a 360 in the first place? You obviously think they want to screw you and always have..
I agree with Deep. Obviously people aren't reading the TANK thread with all the info we have so far. We should probably lock or even delete this thread and wait for all the official info in a couple weeks.
Are you saying that you didn't buy the NES-converter? NVM, that was a low blow, even for my standards.
Microsoft is offering Xbox 360 far more support after its new iteration launches than the first Xbox ever had.
Microsoft has not said they are removing anyones ability to play any game on Xbox 360. If you yourself choose not to purchase the ability to play an arcade game should your console break, that is not Microsofts fault.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox 360.
Microsoft is not forcing people to purchase an Xbox One.
New video game consoles frequently come with new games and improved graphics. This is nothing new. It is the same as it has been for decades. There should be no surprise.
I still have physical books I reread. I still have old games I replay. Microsoft did not raid my house to steal my Xbox 360 console and games so that I can never play with them.
Sometimes when I watch TV I have an itch and scratch my back. Am I to rage about Microsoft refusing to include a backscratcher with their new console? Have they ever said they were going to include one? Do I have any reason to excpect or demand they include one?
Not trying to offend anyone, but just trying to lay out some thoughts I've had in a clear manner. The amount of rage, hysteria, knee jerk reactions, conspiracy theories, and whining over personal wants I've seen over the past few days across many websites about the Xbox One is saddening and staggering. Forgive me if I come off a bit abrasive at times, but often I am just dumbfounded at the things people say or claim. I'd be fine with this thread being locked and a new one formed after E3. I see no reason for that to be a problem.
Personally, I'm all for this thread to remain open, because we're having a discussion. A discussion generally happens between people with differing points of view. I'd be much more in favor for closure of this thread if it was a circle-jerk.
Calling for closure of this thread is telling me that some people aren't getting their way, or feel their viewpoints not being respected and calling for a closure is the last straw to 'win'. You Autarch, are grasping for straws.
What we do know about the Xbone is this:
That does mean something very clear and present for 2o2p at large: Who's going to go Xbone and who's staying 360? What will that mean for clans? Yes, I'm thinking beyond the here and now, and I've been doing that since I joined this thread, which I joined because I still game 360. (<- legit participant)
What will be the wiser choice in the end, PC or Xbone? For many people in the US that will not only mean getting a new system, but also trading up because the pricepoint of the Xbone will probably mean that trading in the old 360 while is worth something makes getting the Xbone realistic. (It's a recession, not everyone can just go out and get a Xbone) For many more it will mean possibly upgrading their Internet. A PC is ultimately a cheaper choice, since it is more versatile and not policed like the Xbone will be. (Systemwide DRM on the Xbone)
Switching to Xbone in my point of view is not a trade up, it's a sacrifice. In games bought, in hardware bought and in arcade titles bought. It will probably mean that clans will splinter into Xbone users and 360 users, at least until everybody has a Xbone. So clans will have to make sacrifices too. If you tender souls already can't handle this thread, what will happen once Xbone gets more ground under it's feet within 2o2p?
I don't think that the E3 will be any deeper than a huge look at what you can do and please gawk at our launch line-up. And a lot of half-dressed japanese girls. Those too.
I was not calling for the thread to be closed, Cat, but saying I didn't have a problem if that happened. I'm fine with it staying open for discussion too. What kind of straw is that, and can I make a hat from it?
Why does buying an Xbox One mean people cannot use their Xbox 360? I'm planning to own both. It does not have to be a one or the other, does it?
No price has been announced officially. Gamestop's CEO has stated that Microsoft told him the price for the console would be LOWER than the cost of the Xbox 360 at its launch. This fits with Microsoft's goals for the console too.
For all we actually know, the Xbox One could cost 50 dollars and come with five free games. It's just as much speculation as any other speculation about price at this point.
And to repeat because it's extremely important - Buying an Xbox One does not mean people can't own an Xbox 360.
Well, maybe you can rush out and get the Xbone without trading in your old 360 to meet the retail-price.
But I still remember that I paid €550,- to buy my silver-rimmed 360 eight years ago. So, the Xbone will likely sit just above that, make it an even €600. It will be too high, I'm sure. But whatever it will be, it won't be something many people just go and get.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one on disability and I'm not even talking about people who work jobs at places that love to lay off personell when the wind changes. Or people on welfare right now, who are also in 2o2p. Or people working low wages.
You can look solely at your own situation, but we're not the bonavista social club. We're 2o2p. Your friends here are more likely to not be in your position. So whatever you're planning is not relevant. I'm glad that you can do both, more power to you. But for many more of us, trading in to trade up, if only to stay current within their clan (for many reasons, not only to have what they have), will be more to the point.
Sooooooooooo, the Xbone will be a bitter pill to swallow for some. And not because of the expected pricepoint alone, but because the Xbone is MS' new direction, which invalidates the 360. There's no amount of talking around that.
If Microsoft expects people who want the new xbox for the tv and entertianment stuff alone to pay over 500 dollars, or over 600 dollars for it, then yes Microsoft is absolutely nuts. I can't see how that would ever make sense considering their entertainment direction to charge a high price at all. Who would buy a way to talk to the tv for that much money? It's not a way to increase market share at all - and considering Microsoft said they want one of these in every living room it is not the direction Microsoft should take. Considering Gamestop's CEO revealed Microsoft told him it should cost less than a launch Xbox 360, I'll trust his word over random guesswork based on trepidation.
An "expected" price point that is ridiculously high is more a sign of ones feelings about the console and backwards compatibility than a realistic expectation given the targetted markets and the reveal of Gamestops CEO.
I agree, if they charge double the cost of a launch Xbox 360, that is one bitter pill to swallow. I have no expectation whatsoever for it to be anywhere close to that though.
I also agree that trading in a console towards one with the ability to play the previous consoles games is a great feature. The higher the price of the new console, the more attractive that feature can be.
I can't reasonably see Microsoft targetting a market while at the same time putting a price that completely eliminates that market. It does not make any sense to me whatsoever. If they were doing only gaming and not any entertainment, I'd expect a higher price than I do now actually.
Just going but I remember because I was an early adapter for the 180 and the 360 (I was still working high wages back then, fortunes change don't they?) I payed FL450,-- for the 180, for that time a bunch of money only hipster-gamers were prepared to drop on the new system. PS-one was still top-dog. It was about FL175,-- more expensive than the exit-prices of the old consoles.
Granted, I bought the exclusive Xbox back then, the normal grey one was around €450. To help you understand the difference between guilders and the later €, that meant the 360 at launch was arounf FL800,--. Even now, an Arcade is €225, around FL600,--
So this new fangled doodad Xbone, that will do more than the 360 at launch will at no point be cheaper than the 360 was at launch. It will be more expensive. That's not conjecture, that looking at things without rose-tinted glasses on.
This thread needs a little funny.
Azure, that is awesome. :)
Haha, yeah I saw that and I could only think of this thread.