Microsoft has solved multi-disc backwards compatibility for 360 games on XB1

[cmdrdredd]

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...racked-multidisc-backward-compatibility/32026

I didn't know this was an issue to begin with, but I guess they solved whatever trouble they had with games that had multiple discs.

 

[Anteaus]

I will get an XB1 the instant Lost Odyssey becomes officially supported.

 

[Sonikku]

BC is the one thing I think Microsoft can really flaunt over Sony. I wish we had PS3 BC on PS4.

 

[smackababy]

I will get an XB1 the instant Lost Odyssey becomes officially supported.

I didn't think about this, but I am totally back on board games other than Fifa if this happens.

 

[cmdrdredd]

BC is the one thing I think Microsoft can really flaunt over Sony. I wish we had PS3 BC on PS4.

Yeah, it's a benefit that the 360 wasn't an overly complicated CPU/GPU design as compared to the PS3.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I will get an XB1 the instant Lost Odyssey becomes officially supported.

I may actually play the game if that happens. Totally skipped that game, but it's super cheap now in the used market. Currently selling for $10

 

[smackababy]

I may actually play the game if that happens. Totally skipped that game, but it's super cheap now in the used market. Currently selling for $10

It is incredibly good. Better JRPG than any FF game released in the past 20 years.

 

[gorcorps]

BC is the one thing I think Microsoft can really flaunt over Sony. I wish we had PS3 BC on PS4.

Many of the most popular ps3 games have been remastered or brought to the new gen in some form, so it hasn't been as problematic as I imagined. Desire to play old games is such a niche market, and one that gets them zero revenue so I understand why they wouldn't bother with it.

 

[Anteaus]

It is incredibly good. Better JRPG than any FF game released in the past 20 years.

Agree completely. It was made by some of the original Final Fantasy developers and it showed it. I hate ATB so for me the Lost Odyssey combat system was the pinnacle of pure turn based combat. This game didn't accept cheese. If the player didn't understand the boss they were fighting the game was very difficult. Unfortunately I when I sold my 360 years ago my first copy of Lost Odyssey went with it. After I heard that the Xbox people were actively trying to get Lost Odyssey supported, I acquired a used copy just in case.

It's a shame Mistwalker shifted their talents into mobile gaming. They really had some magic going with Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey.

 

[sweenish]

Many of the most popular ps3 games have been remastered or brought to the new gen in some form, so it hasn't been as problematic as I imagined. Desire to play old games is such a niche market, and one that gets them zero revenue so I understand why they wouldn't bother with it.

It would get them revenue from digital sales.

 

[clok1966]

Many of the most popular ps3 games have been remastered or brought to the new gen in some form, so it hasn't been as problematic as I imagined. Desire to play old games is such a niche market, and one that gets them zero revenue so I understand why they wouldn't bother with it.

Its just a marketing checkbox, nothing more. Both companies sell old titles digitally, but as you say there are a very small group that this will matter too, and the first step to right a sinking ship (sales) is tiny steps to build some word of mouth. I was disappointed at the lunch that neither felt it was worth the time. I have both systems and quite frankly at this time think they are both sadly lacking must have titles. Drakes came out, that might be one, Bloodborne was close. Other then that.. ehhh maybe i need to replay some old games?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Its just a marketing checkbox, nothing more. Both companies sell old titles digitally, but as you say there are a very small group that this will matter too, and the first step to right a sinking ship (sales) is tiny steps to build some word of mouth. I was disappointed at the lunch that neither felt it was worth the time. I have both systems and quite frankly at this time think they are both sadly lacking must have titles. Drakes came out, that might be one, Bloodborne was close. Other then that.. ehhh maybe i need to replay some old games?

I've said something similar in regards to a new and more powerful model being rumored. What's the point of buying into yet another $400 box that will sit there until there is actually something to do with it. Granted I do play many titles on PC that I would otherwise play on a console if my PC wasn't up to par. Even so, there's only a couple games since the launch of both consoles that I even consider must haves. For some this wouldn't necessarily make the $400 purchase worth it. It's not a lack of games, it's just a lack of really high quality games for me. Those titles that just scream out "you have to buy the console and play this game!" seem to be very few and far between. I've spent a lot of time in games like Destiny and Diablo 3 on my PS4 so I can consider it worth it for that. Though my XB1 saw most use as a go between for my cable box. Now that I ditched cable TV it doesn't even get turned on until there's a game worth playing on it.

 

[Fulle]

I'll play devil's advocate here and be the first person to go to the extreme of "Xbox 360 emulation is bad".

Yes, I did say that. Why though? Well, we just got a really nice running Valkyria Chronicles port today on PS4. Runs at 60 FPS, a good resolution upgrade, and so on. It's just a straight port, but it runs perfect. God of War 3 was similar, you know, and there's the occasional higher effort ports from stuff like The Last of Us, or the Nathan Drake collection. All run really good, a lot of the time significantly better than the original game on PS3. 'Tomb Raider Definitive Edition' would be an example of a game whose port to PS4 runs a LOT better.

Meanwhile, the Xbox emulator runs Reach really poorly. Alan Wake runs great, but not Reach... What do you think the chances are of it getting ported are, with the emulator as a thing? For games like Reach, or Gears of War 3, that run like garbage through the emulator.... think they'll get ported?

So, I suppose it a value add for people, that, you know, don't mind playing Assassin's Creed II with regular frame rate drops into the 20s, but.... eh? You know, I would rather see a port of a game like that to the XBO or PS4, running at 60 FPS at 1080p.

That's me though, I mean I realize some people are just poor or whatever... but I see this as a deterrent for devs to want to port things over to the XBO properly. Long run, I think the system will be forwards compatible, with XBO games running on the next Xbox, so the sooner things get ported the better... but why port things with this emulator present?

 

[digiram]

It is incredibly good. Better JRPG than any FF game released in the past 20 years.

Really? hmm.. better than say.. Xenogears?

 

[smackababy]

Really? hmm.. better than say.. Xenogears?

Imo, yes, but the original Xenogears does come close. The biggest complaint I see about it are that it fits right in with mid 90s RPGs and is decidedly old school.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'll play devil's advocate here and be the first person to go to the extreme of "Xbox 360 emulation is bad".

Yes, I did say that. Why though? Well, we just got a really nice running Valkyria Chronicles port today on PS4. Runs at 60 FPS, a good resolution upgrade, and so on. It's just a straight port, but it runs perfect. God of War 3 was similar, you know, and there's the occasional higher effort ports from stuff like The Last of Us, or the Nathan Drake collection. All run really good, a lot of the time significantly better than the original game on PS3. 'Tomb Raider Definitive Edition' would be an example of a game whose port to PS4 runs a LOT better.

Meanwhile, the Xbox emulator runs Reach really poorly. Alan Wake runs great, but not Reach... What do you think the chances are of it getting ported are, with the emulator as a thing? For games like Reach, or Gears of War 3, that run like garbage through the emulator.... think they'll get ported?

So, I suppose it a value add for people, that, you know, don't mind playing Assassin's Creed II with regular frame rate drops into the 20s, but.... eh? You know, I would rather see a port of a game like that to the XBO or PS4, running at 60 FPS at 1080p.

That's me though, I mean I realize some people are just poor or whatever... but I see this as a deterrent for devs to want to port things over to the XBO properly. Long run, I think the system will be forwards compatible, with XBO games running on the next Xbox, so the sooner things get ported the better... but why port things with this emulator present?

A lot of people don't want to rebuy the game for $50 or $60. That's the problem I have had with all these remasters. The original game can cost $20 but they increase the resolution and charge $60 on the new console. The only reason I can give Sony a pass for this tactic is because so many people owned Xbox consoles and not a PS3.

 

[Aikouka]

It's a shame Mistwalker shifted their talents into mobile gaming. They really had some magic going with Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey.

I really enjoyed Blue Dragon, so I'd love to see some support for that come back. The story may not have been the best in the world, but the gameplay was exactly what I wanted, and with Uematsu doing the soundtrack, there's usually little to complain about there. (It's one of the few game soundtracks that I own!) I actually never finished Lost Odyssey. I remember really, really hating the first boss, because of how ridiculously hard he was. It turns out that all you needed to do was just use items instead of healing spells as items have no cast time. :|

 

[Fulle]

A lot of people don't want to rebuy the game for $50 or $60. That's the problem I have had with all these remasters. The original game can cost $20 but they increase the resolution and charge $60 on the new console. The only reason I can give Sony a pass for this tactic is because so many people owned Xbox consoles and not a PS3.

I think some Publishers can be a little too enthusiastic on their pricing. Where are all these people buying Borderlands The Handsome Collection for $40? Still, though, the majority of the ports are in the $20-30 range at the moment, even without a sale... After a short amount of time they have a high likelihood to end up on sale someplace for $10-15.

 

[smackababy]

A lot of people don't want to rebuy the game for $50 or $60. That's the problem I have had with all these remasters. The original game can cost $20 but they increase the resolution and charge $60 on the new console. The only reason I can give Sony a pass for this tactic is because so many people owned Xbox consoles and not a PS3.

Not really. The PS3 caught up with the Xbox 360 by the end of the generation.

And, it's funny most of the same people crying about all digital new consoles are just fine buying all digital "remasters" of their old games for $40+ a pop.

 

[Lil Frier]

I'll play devil's advocate here and be the first person to go to the extreme of "Xbox 360 emulation is bad".

Yes, I did say that. Why though? Well, we just got a really nice running Valkyria Chronicles port today on PS4. Runs at 60 FPS, a good resolution upgrade, and so on. It's just a straight port, but it runs perfect. God of War 3 was similar, you know, and there's the occasional higher effort ports from stuff like The Last of Us, or the Nathan Drake collection. All run really good, a lot of the time significantly better than the original game on PS3. 'Tomb Raider Definitive Edition' would be an example of a game whose port to PS4 runs a LOT better.

Meanwhile, the Xbox emulator runs Reach really poorly. Alan Wake runs great, but not Reach... What do you think the chances are of it getting ported are, with the emulator as a thing? For games like Reach, or Gears of War 3, that run like garbage through the emulator.... think they'll get ported?

So, I suppose it a value add for people, that, you know, don't mind playing Assassin's Creed II with regular frame rate drops into the 20s, but.... eh? You know, I would rather see a port of a game like that to the XBO or PS4, running at 60 FPS at 1080p.

That's me though, I mean I realize some people are just poor or whatever... but I see this as a deterrent for devs to want to port things over to the XBO properly. Long run, I think the system will be forwards compatible, with XBO games running on the next Xbox, so the sooner things get ported the better... but why port things with this emulator present?

This might affect SOME releases, but it's not like everything was going to get a remaster. More importantly, do we WANT everything getting a remaster? Did Darksiders 2 need one? Did Tomb Raider need one a year after it released on 360/PS3? How many useless ones did we get?

On top of that, are you really advocating that it's bad because we're not getting enough ports and remasters? If that were reality, then Gears Ultimate would have turned into a collection and Gears 4 would have been pushed back another 1-2 years, I'm guessing. We'd have gotten no Gears in 2015, instead getting a collection in 2016 and Gears 4 in 2017. Do we need more Gears pixels from last gen that badly? Would you have wanted Fallout 4, Quantum Break, and others who got BC releases delayed for remasters?

I'd argue the exact opposite. Had 343 not wasted time on The Master Chief Collection that might hold the record for Most Bugs EVER, Non-Bethesda Division, things could have gone better. Instead of a 2014 where an unplayable mess of content 7-13 years old hacked together was released, they could have worked on Halo 5 and put it out. Were they not wasting time getting ODST together to apologize for TMCC, Halo 5 might have gotten more work. Who knows, maybe Halo 5 wouldn't have been a colossal joke and disappointment if the development time for TMCC went to it. OR, maybe Halo 5 would have been junk in 2014, rather than 2015, and then we'd be getting Halo 6 in 2016, rather than praying for the sweet release of Halo 5's death in 2017.

Basically, what you're saying comes off as "man, I wish BC didn't exist so I could just spend this generation doing nothing buy playing old games with new graphics." I'd much rather have Mordor, Dying Light, Sunset Overdrive, Quantum Break, and other experiences that aren't what I just did for the past decade.

I think some Publishers can be a little too enthusiastic on their pricing. Where are all these people buying Borderlands The Handsome Collection for $40? Still, though, the majority of the ports are in the $20-30 range at the moment, even without a sale... After a short amount of time they have a high likelihood to end up on sale someplace for $10-15.

I'd say it's quite the opposite. It's rare that a major port/remaster starts under $40. Even the so-so, broken-as-hell-on-this-gen PayDay 2 was $40+ for its port. I could string together a big list of games where the remastered release was over that--Halo, Uncharted, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, Gears Ultimate, Borderlands, Dishonored, Darksiders 2, GTA V, Diablo 3, Metro Redux, Devil May Cry, and I'm sure there are a few others I couldn't recall or find. It was mostly the smaller/indie stuff (Minecraft comes to mind, for example) that was reasonably priced. Even when it was multiple games, you were usually talking stuff where the content started 5-10 years prior, like with Halo and Metro.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I just hope we start to get more original titles. Doesn't have to be a genre bending title but something with fresh characters and a fresh story. There have only been a couple stand out ones for me. I am kind of glad that uncharted is finished and that metal gear solid is done. These games had their run and as much as I enjoyed them, I feel like it was time to move on.

 

[Sonikku]

Many of the most popular ps3 games have been remastered or brought to the new gen in some form, so it hasn't been as problematic as I imagined. Desire to play old games is such a niche market, and one that gets them zero revenue so I understand why they wouldn't bother with it.

Difference being Microsoft lets you play your own collection. Sony wants you to pay for them all over again. The lack of BC on PS4 is profit driven.

 

[Fulle]

@Lil Frier

On a lot of PS3/Xbox360 games, they were already made in middleware that's compatible with the PS4/XBO, with a lot of the work done with a PC port anyway. Porting to the Xbox One or PS4 is trivial from that point. It's not something that eats into new development significantly, to where new games aren't being made because old games are being ported. A small 3rd party studio dropping 3 months into a port, isn't the same thing as a main studio getting pulled away from their next project for a year.

There are occasional bad ports. 343's incompetence is legendary at this point, but a lot of other developers know what they're doing, and there's dev studios that specialize in porting things... The Tomb Raider port you mentioned is an example of a good port, actually, especially for it's PS4 version. The PS3/Xbox360 versions of Tomb Raider had frequent drops into the 20s in FPS, along with other issues, and the Definitive Edition for PS4/XBO ran very smoothly, and had some decent graphics upgrades. A much better experience, IMHO. Also, since the porting was done almost entirely by little 3rd party studios, the development of Rise of the Tomb Raider wasn't delayed at all...

In light of the PS4/XBO gen being something of a starting point with consoles on X86 hardware, I think it's likely that what gets ported now, will be playable on newer hardware too. So I do think it would be a good thing if my favorite games from last gen are all ported over.... although on the PS4 side a lot of the more important games have already been ported.


@Sonikku

The PS3's cell processor is probably not going to be easy to emulate, especially on a system with little jaguar cores like the PS4. I don't think that Sony could implement something similar to XBO's 360 emulation if they have a mountain of money to dedicate to the idea.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Difference being Microsoft lets you play your own collection. Sony wants you to pay for them all over again. The lack of BC on PS4 is profit driven.

Of course. Like I mentioned previously I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people bought them on PS4 because they owned an Xbox 360 and not a PS3.

 

[Lil Frier]

On a lot of PS3/Xbox360 games, they were already made in middleware that's compatible with the PS4/XBO, with a lot of the work done with a PC port anyway. Porting to the Xbox One or PS4 is trivial from that point. It's not something that eats into new development significantly, to where new games aren't being made because old games are being ported. A small 3rd party studio dropping 3 months into a port, isn't the same thing as a main studio getting pulled away from their next project for a year.

There are occasional bad ports. 343's incompetence is legendary at this point, but a lot of other developers know what they're doing, and there's dev studios that specialize in porting things... The Tomb Raider port you mentioned is an example of a good port, actually, especially for it's PS4 version. The PS3/Xbox360 versions of Tomb Raider had frequent drops into the 20s in FPS, along with other issues, and the Definitive Edition for PS4/XBO ran very smoothly, and had some decent graphics upgrades. A much better experience, IMHO. Also, since the porting was done almost entirely by little 3rd party studios, the development of Rise of the Tomb Raider wasn't delayed at all...

In light of the PS4/XBO gen being something of a starting point with consoles on X86 hardware, I think it's likely that what gets ported now, will be playable on newer hardware too. So I do think it would be a good thing if my favorite games from last gen are all ported over.... although on the PS4 side a lot of the more important games have already been ported

While 343 has generally been pretty crappy on the whole (Halo 5 blows, IMO), I think TMCC was simply too ambitious. They discussed how they were basically trying to tape 4 legacy systems together and make them cooperate on a new one, and that's just not smart. I'd have much rather seen them just take a few years to work on that as a secondary release from the ground up. It shouldn't have been built to run on its original networking stuff, because it ended up causing a lot of problems.

As for what we got with Rise of the Tomb Raider, it's hard to agree. We don't KNOW there wasn't any hangup, and given its release was originally set for a single platform, that remastering totally could have been part of it, with the paid exclusivity just a means of limiting it.

I agree x86 helps with it in the future, but I still am annoyed at how little there is for me to play on the horizon.