Gryph Posted May 19, 2005 Posted May 19, 2005 Hey, Microsoft were the ones that said it'll be backwards compatible with the top titles and that they are going to have to recompile the games to run on the new console. So it seems Microsoft is the one who is being sketchy about this and posing porting as backwards compatibility. That's what it seems like, don't you agree?
Bluestinger X Posted May 19, 2005 Author Posted May 19, 2005 this is how i see it.. they say BC. That means ur gona be able to play the top titles on the xbox 360 from the orginal disk without buying anything more. Like i mentioned before what most likely is the deal ur gona put the disk in and xbox live (the free one) will see the title and will download a new version of the xbe to the hd (which shouldnt be anymore then 10 mb) and then the game will play just like on the orginal xbox. See that makes since.. u will be able to play them for free without buying anything extra. Yes they may need to recompile a new xbe but the idea of making them pay for it? nah thats insane they would in no way shape or form call that BC.
Lucandrake Posted May 19, 2005 Posted May 19, 2005 I'll laugh if PS3 comes out and it doesnt live up to the hype, just like PS2
Wizard Posted May 19, 2005 Posted May 19, 2005 Funny, 2 anti-company posts minutes within each other.
Gryph Posted May 19, 2005 Posted May 19, 2005 I see your point. They shouldn't charge for the new XBE but I would not be surprised if that's how they used the Marketplace to download them. The way I see it is that Microsoft my charge a small fee ($1-$5) to download this recompiled XBE because they'll say something like "hey, we recompiled this for you and put it on our servers so we deserve a little compensation." Perhaps they may do it like they are doing with Halo 2 maps, pay some now (what a flocking ripoff that is, just absolutely pathetic) or get it free after a few months. Never underestimate the power of corporate greed. They won't pass up the chance to get money if they feel they can get away with it. Hell, the XBOX took a hit in every financial quarter except one so I think they might try to make up the loss any way they can. That's just me and my mistrust of corporations talking.
Gryph Posted May 20, 2005 Posted May 20, 2005 Alright, Microsoft cleared up their comments. They do have some sense. God I hate crappy reporting. I was wrong because of them. "At launch, Xbox 360 will be backward compatible with the top Xbox games," Xbox PR manager Michael Wolf told GamesIndustry.biz today. "Our goal is to have every Xbox game work on Xbox 360. You will NOT need to purchase a new 'version' - your original games will work on Xbox 360."
Bluestinger X Posted May 20, 2005 Author Posted May 20, 2005 lol well if they would have just made that clear in the first place people wouldnt be speculating on it.
Bluestinger X Posted May 21, 2005 Author Posted May 21, 2005 Xbox vs 360 comparison chart http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html How come sony was showing it being 3 times as fast?
Wizard Posted May 21, 2005 Posted May 21, 2005 Because in theory Cell is faster then next gen PowerPC CPUs, which the Xbox 360 uses.
O-Fear Posted May 21, 2005 Posted May 21, 2005 (edited) Here's a wallpaper I made for u 1024x768 users! http://img138.echo.cx/img138/2408/gearsofwar27jp.jpg Edited May 22, 2005 by O-Fear
ken_cinder Posted May 21, 2005 Posted May 21, 2005 Because in theory Cell is faster then next gen PowerPC CPUs, which the Xbox 360 uses. The PS3 IS running PowerPC...................mind you it's architecture is different in the way that, not just it's core is there, but several DSP in the same die. Quite frankly, that poses a serious heat dissipation issue IMO. Oh and on another but related note, the performance specs Sony provided, had to have been whipped up by some tool for show. The final designs aren't even in yet, and how can you base performance on pre-rendered crap? Combining the performance of the DSPs and the GPU don't count for crap, 2+2 doesn't = 4 remember? You can't combine the GPU FLOPS with the CPU FLOPS and call it like it appears.The CPU has to feed the GPU data first off, so theres some overhead that gives no actual output, and then theres the fact that if you were to "combine" the power, you wouldn't be able to use all of it, because unless the CPU and GPU were equal in power, one would be bottlenecking the other. And look at the PS2, it's "power" was so hyped up that it was a blatant lie what they told people it was actually capable of.
Gryph Posted May 21, 2005 Posted May 21, 2005 An interesting comparison but I wonder why they added the EDRAM bandwidth since it's not part of the CPU+GPU bandwidth pipeline. But the XBOX 360 is a beast which makes me like it even more.
Lucandrake Posted May 21, 2005 Posted May 21, 2005 Make of it what you will, but be clear we know Microsoft has clearly slanted this info, Does that mean they tinkered with some of the info (microsoft not IGN)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now