Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

More Xbox Titles Added to 360 List 95

Posted by Zonk from the backwards-compatability-in-a-chocolate-egg dept.
Eurogamer reports that Microsoft will be adding more titles to its list of backwards compatible games. From the article: "Microsoft has made a minor update to the Xbox 360 backwards compatibility list, adding patches to allow three new titles to run on the new console - namely Black, Star Wars Battlefront II, and Winning Eleven 9. The update, which is the first change to the list of backwards compatible titles in several months, also fixes issues with a number of games which previously worked with the Xbox 360 but had bugs in the compatibility code, including Ninja Gaiden, Fable, Half-Life 2 and GTA San Andreas."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Xbox Titles Added to 360 List More

More Xbox Titles Added to 360 List

Comments Filter:

  • KOTOR, KOTOR II are lumpy on 360... (Score:3, Informative)

    by otis wildflower ( 4889 ) on Thursday March 30, 2006 @01:36PM (#15027355) Homepage
    ... At least when I tried them, there were pretty constant hiccups in camera movement and pauses when trying to do real-time style combat.. Halo 2 is pretty tight though, even in splitscreen.

    I was thinking of getting a 360 to play XBL Call of Duty with the nephews, but they'll have to live with Halo 2 until I get a HD 1080p set..
    • Yeah, not to mention the constant sound hiccups, the fact that audio goes dead occasionally, the crashes and the fact that the character movement animations sometimes dies, leaving your Jedi 'floating through space' when you walk.

      And I was so looking forward to play Jade Empire in 720p. :-(
    • Except for the 360 exports in 1080i as its highest resolution. ;-)

    • I was thinking of getting a 360 to play XBL Call of Duty with the nephews, but they'll have to live with Halo 2 until I get a HD 1080p set..

      Why would you waste your money on a 1080p set when the Xbox 360 only does 720p/1080i? Not only that, (practically) nothing else does 1080p either, and most 1080p TVs don't accept 1080p signals even if you had a source to drive them. Worse, for those few sets that do handle 1080p input, the framerate of 1080p is around 25fps-30fps. Sufficient for TV and movies, no

      • Why would you waste your money on a 1080p set when the Xbox 360 only does 720p/1080i?

        So I can play World of Warcraft on it?

        1080p is the highest resolution there will be for at least 10-15 years. Why buy a set which you'll have to junk when you have upgrade lust?

        • 1080p is the highest resolution there will be for at least 10-15 years. Why buy a set which you'll have to junk when you have upgrade lust?

          But 1080p as a standard is not fully fleshed out, you have to really hunt to find a TV that will actually accept a 1080p input, and even then it may not accept a non-HDCP input (1080p only being supported via HDMI). Good luck getting a PC to display a 1920x1080 signal with HDCP.

          I'd rather save $1000-2000 now and buy a 720p set, and then upgrade to 1080p in a couple

  • I miss the days when "Backwards compatibility" were a hardware feature and not some kind of emulation that requires constant Internet updates...
    • You mean like MS's other backward compatible programs - http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/28/091 2246 [slashdot.org].
    • C'mon, that's how Microsoft has maintained such quality in Windows!

    • Re:I miss real backwards compatibility (Score:4, Informative)

      by wampus ( 1932 ) on Thursday March 30, 2006 @01:55PM (#15027544)
      Given the radically different architecture between the two consoles, I think it is damn impressive that they were able to achieve the number of titles that do play on the 360.

      Would you rather see an Xbox 360 that is nothing more than a faster Intel CPU with a faster Nvidia GPU and more RAM? It may hurt a bit at first to break full backwards compatibility, but you can't drag your legacy stuff along indefinitely, eventually the cruft builds up. I'd like to think that MS learned this lesson with Windows.
    • Personally I'd rather the hardware continue to advance as needed and have backwards compatibility be a secondary objective. I don't want my (supposedly) cutting-edge machine hampered by being forced to handle 5-year old technology. If they can have it both ways by some handy-dandy emulation, then good for them.
      • The PS2 wasn't exactly hindered by it's backwards compatibility with the PS1, and it will very likely be the PS3's backwards compatibility with the PS2 that saves the PS3 from total failure. (That is, I wouldn't count on very many must have PS3 first generation titles).

    • Re:I miss real backwards compatibility (Score:5, Informative)

      by drewmca ( 611245 ) on Thursday March 30, 2006 @03:25PM (#15028587)
      Like on the old Nintendo and Sega systems? Oh right, they weren't BC.

      Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles. The only major system to have done it before now was PS2 with PS1. So there really weren't ever any good ol' days for this feature.
      • Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles.

        The Atari 7800 was backwards-compatible with the 2600 out of the box.

        The Atari 5200, ColecoVision, and IntelliVision all had add-on modules to play 2600 games (although this was basically just a 2600 that used the controllers and video output of the newer console).

        Similarly, the Sega Genesis had an add-on module to play Master System games.

        As someone else mentioned, the Gameboy has always been backwards-compatible.

        So, no, it's not really
        • It is a new idea as far as being expected behavior. For consoles. The Atari backwards compatibility was an exception rather than the rule. Gameboy compatibility is a different affair, because that's not really console gaming. And the others you mention involve add-on modules, which isn't really system backwards compatibility. It's BC with a peripheral, which is something else entirely (especially for the ones that provide compatibility with games from another system). You're talking about add-on emulators,
      • Yeah, the Gameboy is just a minor player in the videogame scene. Not.
        • irrelevant (the size of the gameboy market). Gameboy is huge in gaming, as are PCs. But we're talking about console compatibility.

          Oh nevermind. You'll just disagree with me anyway.
          • The Gameboy is a video game console. It is a piece of computer hardware designed (primarily) to play video games through the use of interchangeable cartridges/discs/cards. The fact that it can run on batteries and doesn't need a TV is irrelevant.
            • OK, fine, you win, the Gameboy is a console. So now we've got

              Atari 7800 - BC
              Jaguar - not BC
              Genesis - not BC without accessory
              Super Nintendo - not BC
              Saturn - not BC
              Nintendo64 - not BC
              Dreamcast - not BC
              Gamecube - not BC
              PS2 - BC
              Gameboy Advance - BC
              Nintendo DS - BC

              So you've got 4 out of 11 that are backwards compatible in pretty much the history of gaming consoles. That's not exactly a golden heyday of backwards compatibility now, is it?

              The numbers you'll see in the future will change that, of course, because n
              • How about we phrase it this way and see if it sounds any different:

                The two most successful consoles of all time have been backwardly compatible.

                And the PS3 is going to be. Hence Microsoft's pretence at BC, it's what the customer expects these days - they can't afford not to have it.
              • Now you're changing your argument. You originally said:

                <i>Backwards compatibility is a relatively new idea with gaming consoles. The only major system to have done it before now was PS2 with PS1. So there really weren't ever any good ol' days for this feature.</i>

                As I and others have pointed out, both your points here are wrong. Backwards-compatibility is not new, the Atari 7800 did it, and several older consoles (Genesis, Super NES) had hardware emulation through add-ons. Also, backwards-com
                • Perhaps I should have been clearer. The idea that backwards compatibility is an EXPECTED feature is new. It has popped up from time to time in the past but has never been a bullet point feature for a console until the PS2 did it, and the GBA after it (or maybe vice versa, though neither really had much influence on the other because they're in different markets). This generation of consoles (xbox360, ps3, rev) is the first generation where is was expected, and where companies got flak when they didn't promi
    • You miss the days?

      PS2 is absolutely 100% compatible with PS. And PS3 will be absolutely 100% campatible with PS2 and PS. Another example? Gameboy Advance is completely compatible with old Gameboy games, and the Nintendo DS, while it's compatibility is limited to GBA games, it still plays every GBA game perfectly. So, if you want backwards compatibility, then don't buy a 360.
      • PS2 is like 99% compatible. Some anthologies of old games won't work (like some of the Midway/Williams packs) and certain games like Tomba 2 don't work either. My GBA crashed on at least one GBC game. Oddly enough this never happened on the Gameboy Player so who knows. I am pretty sure there was at least one or two GBC games that don't work with the GBA, or maybe I'm thinking of just the SP. Regardless, I am picking nits here, but you can't say 100% because that's not quite true.
      • Well the xbox 360 was never really meant to be backwards compatable is was a last minute panic thing. With the estimates for the end of game licences and the cessation of production of the original in the first quarter of next year, there is a lot of resistance from game producers and retailers about sales resistance that will create (as well as range of games that have as yet to generate a postive return - like duh - being a microsoft partner is just the right to be screwed whilst having to sign a non-disc
  • ...you have to release bug fix patches for a console.

    Not having to worry about bugs, installations, and updates are major factors in what makes consoles more appealing than PCs for gaming. It seems to me Microsoft is failing to realize this.
    • You knew this was coming once they started adding hard drives into the console. What do you need for a save game? A whole bunch of state variables? That's not really data intensive. The moment I heard that the first XBox was coming out with a hard drive, my first reaction was "Oh boy, here comes the patches." Yes, I do think it's better to get save games from a hard drive than some plug-in storage device, but the size of the hard drives made it obvious that they were looking to use it for more than just sav
    • Considering backwards compatibility was something they initially wasn't planning on implementing or supporting, I would think that griping about bugs for an optional feature is really nitpicking.
      • er... weren't planning on supporting. Damn me for not previewing.
      • It's not a flipping optional feature, they've sold / marketed the product to do it, how they do it WE DON'T CARE we just want it to work.

        To add to that the PS2 is nearly 6 years old or so, with a HUGE library of games and no replacement on the shelves yet.

        The Xbox is 4.5? nearly 5 years old, already has a replacement and has a medium library of games- the least these people can do is make it backwards compatible, especially seeing as some of the games on the Xbox 1 really aren't looking dated to be honest.

    • Re:You know you're in trouble when... (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      But Microsoft is simply bringing the PC experience to console players! Just think of the million of console gamers who never got to install drivers, tweak video cards and overclock their systems. They have truly missed out on the Microsoft Gamer Experience, and this is what Microsoft is all about!

      In fact, all these so-called "bugs" you heard about (overheating power bricks, scratched disks, dubious backwards compatability) are not bugs at all, but part of a much larger plan to let XBox 360 oweners in on t
    • That's not even the half of it. They're starting to flesh out the content in "patches" now, as well. It's got a good side and a bad side, but I'm sure going to miss the time when the word "release" meant something.
    • Console games have always been buggy - if I had the time I could sit down and write a massive list of all the console games with horrible bugs, even crash bugs, going back to early NES releases. IMHO, finally being able to patch the damned things beats the hell out of paying $50 for a game, not being able to return it, and never being able to do anything with bugs aside from getting used t them.
    • I'm going to put this nicely. You're an idiot.

      MS decided to go with emulation because the hardware alternative (sticking an Intel chipset and nVidia graphics core) was unpalatable. It's the exact same technique Revolution is going to use to emulate 20-year old consoles, and Sony will likely do the same thing.

      There's no way to get an emulator completely right the first try. Period. End of story. There's always going to be an instruction here or a game there that doesn't work the way it should. Emulator

      • MS decided to go with emulation because the hardware alternative (sticking an Intel chipset and nVidia graphics core) was unpalatable. It's the exact same technique Revolution is going to use to emulate 20-year old consoles, and Sony will likely do the same thing.

        Sony may do something similar, but what made them decide to do this in the PS2, was that they were already including the chips that made up the PS1 processor (but using them in a different capacity) inside the box. I imagine that made it easier

        • The main reason why companies don't put the older hardware in is cost. If there's 2 versions of a console, one that has software emulation and one that has hardware emulation for $50 more, I'll take the software version. Not only am I saving $50, but I'm also ensuring if any updates need to be made I can do so.

          People seem to forget that there was some major problems with PS2 emulation (which, like you said, used a combination of the PS1 hardware and software). Any time you go the hardware route, you run

      • Why do you think the NES emulation scene, for example, still releases updates for palattes?

        This isn't really a valid point. Palettes have nothing to do with the actual machine emulation, but more with the difference between output devices (TVs vs. computer monitors). It's a matter of aesthetics rather than technical correctness.

        However, it's important to note that "mature" emulators for old systems are still being improved upon. This is of course similar to your statement that it's pretty much impos

        • The palattes aren't really an aesthetic matter. If they aren't right the screen can become completely garbled to the point that the game is unplayable. To this day many emulators have difficulty with games like Castlevania III because of this (although a few have gotten the majority of the palattes right).
          • I dunno dude, my understanding of palettes is that they are a bunch of color values that attempt to recreate the colors you would see "naturally occurring" on a TV or whatever kind of screen the console in question natively uses. And they are required because running a (let's say NES) emulator on a computer next to a real NES running on a TV will give you different colors. So you could technically call it "emulation", but it's more emulating a TV than the actual hardware.

            Regarding garbling, that has nothi

  • SSX3 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nb caffeine ( 448698 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {enieffacbn}> on Thursday March 30, 2006 @01:54PM (#15027531) Homepage Journal
    I just saw this in the morning so I haven't had a chance to check it out yet, but hopefully they fixed the issues with ssx3. It technically would load and you'd be able to play, but saving didn't work and there was some serious slowdowns in play. I also see they updated Forza, which had some minor slowdowns, and when racing at 150 mph, that did not help my already questioable racing skills :)

    Gonna be shredding it up on the mountain tonight :)

    • Re:SSX3 (Score:2, Informative)

      by Osty ( 16825 )

      I also see they updated Forza, which had some minor slowdowns, and when racing at 150 mph, that did not help my already questioable racing skills.

      The only slowdown I saw on Forza prior to this update was when I raced in an in-car view with the rearview mirror turned on (which is how I race, so it happened all the time). Turning off the rearview mirror removed all of the slowdown issues I had. This update fixed the issue so now I can race with my rearview mirror turned back on, but the game was definit

      • That is also how I play, and the rearview is a crutch I'm not willing to give up. Thanks for confirming that it's fixed, you just made the last 4 hours of work that much longer!
  • I wish they'd get Mech Assault I & II working.

  • Well, That's Not Entirely True (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MikeyTheK ( 873329 ) on Thursday March 30, 2006 @01:57PM (#15027565)
    ...The update, which is the first change to the list of backwards compatible titles in several months...

    It might be the first change to THE LIST in several months, but the 360 patch that was released last month added support for Tom Clancey's Ghost Recon II, among others, for the first time, enabling me to stop using my original XBox except for DDR (the dance mats aren't compatible with the 360, so I haven't even bothered to see if the game is). So while the list might have not been updated in a while, the periodic patches have added more backwards compatibility.
  • I was hoping to see support added for "Deadly Alliance", but it seems that "Decpetion" has even been removed from the list [xbox.com].

  • Still missing the bets (Score:3, Informative)

    by fahrvergnugen ( 228539 ) <fahrvNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Thursday March 30, 2006 @02:34PM (#15027982) Homepage
    Still missing, the two best titles on the console:
    Psychonauts
    Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath

    Damn.
  • ...get the impression that Microsoft is using their shoddy "backwords compatibility" to mentally start brainwashing us into thinking that backwards compatibility is bad?

    Look at it this way - for people like me who saw this coming and held on to my original Xbox to play my original Xbox games, they can migrate the masses to the newer console while stile quoting a large install base of the original Xbox.

    It is a sad day for gaming indeed. I'm actually thinking that when it comes to backwards compatibility

  • ..and I'm big Microsoft fanboy. But 3 games? And one I specifically had to dig out and hook up my original Xbox for? C'mon MS, must try harder :)
  • 1) After M$'s latest Vista F-up, some of the XBox team is headed over to "help" with Vista. Kiss your backwards compatibility goodbye.

    2) "Uh...well, you can buy this XBox 360 with the noisy fan and unreliable power supply here for $300 or the old XBox that just fucking works for $75 off eBay. Either one can play your favorite game."
    • 1) Has been debunked (by a PR guy, yeah i know, so who really knows)

      2) My old Xbox is in my bedroom now, XBMC for my nighttime Divx watching. Its just nicer that I can bust out some of my old faves on the 360. But the kicker is that the 360 can play Xbox 360 games
      • " 1) Has been debunked (by a PR guy, yeah i know, so who really knows)"

        OK, I'm a smart-ass. Windows backwards compatibility has generally been OK through releases.

        "2) Its just nicer that I can bust out some of my old faves on the 360. But the kicker is that the 360 can play Xbox 360 games"

        Here's the problem, I think. The XBox games that are currently available are not enough of a draw by themselves. So, they have to keep retro-porting the good titles from the old platform. If that's a main part

        • I wouldn't say the "main" appeal to the 360 is the original xbox games. In fact, I rarely play anything other than the retail 360 games (and marble blast... mmmmm) on my 360. But it is nice to be able to put in regular xbox games that I have that are less than a year old and play them on my 360. Wireless controllers are nice, and the fact that my original xbox is in another room doesn't help

  • I hate to say it but... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Hamster Lover ( 558288 ) * on Thursday March 30, 2006 @04:04PM (#15029025) Journal
    I was extremely confident that Microsoft could pull a rabbit out of the hat and that the 360 would offer, at the very least, workable compatibility for their "A" list of games. As anyone can tell you, most of the "compatible" games are barely so and some listed as compatible just aren't. There are a handful of games that are playable, notably Halo 2, but the level of compatibility for some games, such as Ninja Gaiden, is so bad that they're basically unplayable. In time Microsoft will probably get the compatibility up, but there are going to be some games that will never be compatible regardless of Microsoft's commitment to do so.

    I hate to say it, but if you're going to buy a 360 based in part on the ability to play existing Xbox games as I was, hold off, because it just ain't there yet. Those without an Xbox and waiting for the 360 to come down in price should really check out the existing Xbox, which currently sells for as little as $177 Canadian with two games.
    • As anyone can tell you, most of the "compatible" games are barely so and some listed as compatible just aren't.

      Ah, we have the answer at last! MS are clearly using Cedega for the compatibility layer.
  • What does this say about the 360 when its backwards compatibility with old Xbox titles is major news? Shouldn't we be interested in 360 titles instead?
  • Sounds just like a PC.
    Trust Microsoft to nibble away at the basic nature of a product (trouble free entertainment) and turn it into something else.

    I don't think it's all bad mind, but it sounds like precisely the kind of hassle (especially, the fact this is the *second* patch for some games) that I *wouldn't* want from a console.
  • The backwards compatibility of the 360 is still a complete joke as there is no way to move save games from the original xbox to the 360. This makes it pretty useless for any of the longer games.

    I hope the PS3 doesn't make the same mistake. I would assume it would work, but I've not yet seen anything that actually says that the PS3 will take memory cards from the PS2.
    • Well, the PlayStation 2 accepted PlayStation One memory cards, so I'm hoping Sony's head never went up their ass at some point.

      • The Ps3 will not have the ability to use Ps1 or Ps2 memory cards. The bad news is that those of you with lengthy completed games (or games in progress) on ps1/ps2 will have to start from scratch unless you get a Dexdrive or something similar.

        The GOOD news is that Ps1/Ps2/Ps3 games will now all use the same card/hard drive for saves which is great since ps1 cards are going to be increasingly hard to come by, and swapping between 3 different formats to save my games would suck.

  • Well the other reason is Microsoft have this strange initiative to make all the games run in 720p that are backwards compatible

    ARGH, so some of these B/C games are going to look REALLY good because the Xbox really isn't that bad graphically, despite it's age.

    So Microsoft are kinda stuck, do they release something like jade empire which looks really quite nice at 4:3 480p so that it does 720p (pillarboxed, I would guess?) ?
    Cause it's going to look GOOD - so good infact hell I might just play that rather t
  • It's going to be damn hard to preserve gaming legacy if things keep heading in this direction.

    Nothing lasts forever. Even if your 360 is still working in ten years, I'd be willing to bet that you wouldn't be able to get online for multiplayer and patches because Microsoft wouldn't ne supporting it. If that happens, what are we left with? A bunch of buggy, not quite whole games that we'll never be able to play in their "entirety" again?

    Something tells me that the road we're heading down means that, so

  • Winning Eleven 9

    which just beat out the alternative title, "Winning Nine 11".

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close