Backwards compatiblity for next generation consoles? Don't count on it, says Electronic Arts' chief financial officer Blake Jorgensen. Speaking at the Goldman Sachs Technology and Internet Conference in San Francisco this week (via Gamasutra), Jorgensen dropped a few hints as to the contents of what he calls "gen-4" machines, given current market trends.
"The reality is, is that fiscal year 2014 will still be a fairly large gen-three if there's a console business that comes in at the tail end of the year," Jorgensen observed at one point. "Mainly because a lot of our titles are built around sports calendars. And so a FIFA, a Madden, an NCAA, an NHL title, all come out aligned with the sports calendar."
"An important thing to remember is that next-gen consoles will most likely not be backwards compatible..." Jorgensen added, without elaboration. "And if you [play] multiplayer on a game, you'll most likely not be able to play with someone on a different generation.
"And so if you're a FIFA player and, and the soccer season's starting in August, and all your friends are playing FIFA, you're going to want to be on the same box that they're on. So if they all go out and buy a gen-four box if it comes out at Christmas, then you'll most likely do it. If they all hold on and continue to play on third-generation, you'll probably not see that box purchase until after the soccer season's over.
"And I think that works for us positively in both ways," he concluded. "It helps us continue to sell gen-three products, and it will help us sell gen-four product as that cycle finally gets into place."
Ensuring backwards compatibility for a console can be an expensive business. Either you build the old tech into your new machine, or you commit to issuing software updates for each of the titles in your old catalogue. Microsoft announced that it was "winding down" original Xbox compatibility efforts in 2008.
17 comments so far...
BIGBUTTER on 13 Feb '13 said:
The Next Console HAS to be able to play 360 games! Its a must
CunningSmile on 13 Feb '13 said:
Not surprising to me personally. The 360 is only about 50% backwards compatible, and that required each game to be massively patched, the PS3 again wasn't completely and the PS3 Slim isn't at all. In fact the only console in history that was completely BC was the PS2 yet to listen to gamers you'd think that it was as integral a part of gaming as moving pictures.
Here's an idea guys, if you're that desperate to keep playing 360 games don't get rid of your 360. Demanding BC is only going to hold back the next gen consoles by effectively tie one hand behind the back of the tech.
SidTheSloth on 13 Feb '13 said:
>Phew< I was beginning to think they'd cancelled the next gen consoles as it'd been a while since i heard/read a rumour...
I predict mass hysteria on the back of this one, similar to when news of the pre-owned block was announced. Faced with reality, how many of us have played original xbox titles on the 360? I played Halo 2 and the original Fable near launch but since then have had very little urge to do so.
It's lamentable, but not world ending - like Cunning says, keep your 360 and it's hardly even an issue right?
What would be nice is if they do bring in the pre-owned block and make everything registered digitally, if they could let us digitally register our 360 titles and download a fully BC digital version on our nice new shiny consoles. A tiger is more likely to climb out of my bottom with a sack full of cash whistling the great escape, but it'd still be nice...
FishyGinger on 13 Feb '13 said:
The wii (ok old version) is backwards compatible. You do need a GC controller though.
I can understand it. Would have been nice if it were backwards but it's not a massive thing. I won't be getting Gerty for quite some time though.
Bezza89 on 13 Feb '13 said:
They weren't in HD or have achievements though, if they'd done either I'd have replayed the hell out of it, like with Halo CEs rerelease - wouldn't this just mean we'd be subject to more releases of older games we can't play on our gerts?
I'm sure the only problem is people that (myself included) want a nice, tidy set-up, I've already got around four different devices connected to my tv and having to add another one or keep swapping out the 360 everytime I want to play a game on it is a bit shit when they can just have backwards compat. The major changes from this gen to next surely wont be as drastic - we're in HD now, both will support the same stuff, if MS want an 'all in one' console this would surely be necessary.
Another problem is money, I'm sure a lot of people want to trade in their 360s to subsidise the cost.
It doesn't make sense marketing wise, business wise - what, we're going to get rid of the entire XBLA for the nextbox? We're starting from scratch with nothing? Not even with their all in one plans. No, we wont be able to play xbox 1 games on it, but I can't see them marketing it with; buy a gertrude where we have a catalogue of... between nothing and about 4 games instead of well over 1000. Don't make me laugh.
SidTheSloth on 13 Feb '13 said:
You make a good point, let's just wait and see - tis all we can do as we're force fed these rumours etc. I actually think BC will be tougher for Sony than MS given the current system architecture etc, but none of us knows for sure, nor will we for a while.
There is precedent for the arcade stuff with the Wii-U, virtual console purchases from the Wii have to be re-bought on the Wii U (as i understand, i read this so not 100% sure of its accuracy) albeit at a heavily discounted rate - but is 10MP not too many for something you've theoretically already bought? Like i said though, wait and see time, and Nintendo have long been a law unto themselves...
battfink83 on 13 Feb '13 said:
what about the wii and wii u?, and the original ps3? completely BC, all 3 of them.
"The next gen Xbox "most likely" won't play Xbox 360 games, claims EA exec"
then i 'most likely' wont be investing in one for a while, a long while, untill im thouroughly done playing its catalogue, times have changed, i like many others have invested alot of cash into certain games, dlc season passes and so on means alot of cash has been spent, if this rumours true, it shows me they simply do not care for this,
all this talk of the new xbox being an all singing, all dancing 'replace everything else under your tv' box.... oh but you have to keep your old console stacked on top of it if you want to continue playing the games you'e spent thousands on
Bezza89 on 13 Feb '13 said:
Perhaps that is where this rumour came from - it's an EA exec therefore I give it a bit more weight than the other rumours, but he'll have surely seen/heard something and with a PS4 announcement rumoured soon, maybe he's seen that isn't BC because they're on silly cell processors or something.
I'm only bothered because I'd love to trade in my aging 360 which will brake as soon as BC is disabled and I just get a gert sods law style, and, I am a tad neat - I don't want another box under my tv, tooooooo maaaaaaaaaaaannnnnyyyyy wiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeessssssssssss.
msbhvn on 13 Feb '13 said:
The original PS3 was only backwards compatible because it had a PS2 CPU in it, which was an expensive and inelegant solution that was probably only put in place to placate the people who were demanding it. If I recall correctly there was more uproar about the PS3 slim not being able to run Linux anymore than PS2 games.
The Gamecube, Wii and Wii U all use successively more powerful versions of the same processor, so backwards compatibility is a simple thing. Hackers have even run Gamecube games on the Wii U, which isn't officially an option due to lack of GC controller/memory card ports, all they had to do was tell the CPU to run at the GC's speed.
Since MS seem to have switched CPU architectures again, if the AMD rumours are to be believed, then backwards compatibility will be just as problematic as it was on the 360. I'm more concerned about how long the 360 will be supported after the next Xbox is available. There are some that have invested over seven years of time and money into XBLA, XBLIG and retail games, and the possibility of things being lost in the transition isn't very appealing.
Metalrodent on 13 Feb '13 said:
Think of the joy you'll have when MS announce that the next xbox will only have wired controllers, and will need at least 17 different cables in order to get any of it to work, plus the 6 cables needed for kinect 2.0
mike199220 on 13 Feb '13 said:
I think that microsoft should make the top of the line next gen model with a partition.
For example, if the hard drive is 1TB, then 320GB would be reserved for the xbox 360 and all nessecary data required for the 360 OS+games and the remaining 680GB would be reserved for the next gen systems OS.
If it's a 500GB hard drive, then 120GB would be reserved for xbox 360 OS+Games and 380GB reserved for next gen systemas.
Essentialy, it would be a dual Operating system with selection at power-up,
Similar to how microsoft have done with windows 8 and windows 7
I'm also gonna say that if microsoft doesn't make backwards compatability availible in some way, they will lose a lot of custom. it would be foolish if they don't include backwards compatability, especially in their higher models. the sugesstion i have provided is definatley possible. i hope they do include backwards compatability, or i will be purchasing either the ps4 or the steambox. i would be sad if i had to purchase one of these consoles because microsoft neglected to include backwards compatability.
AllusiveTurtle on 13 Feb '13 said:
Well, as someone that has over 350 360 games, I obviously hope that the next console is backwards compatible, as I have no desire to sell every one of my games and start again. I fear there may be some truth to the rumour, not only because of the source, but also because Microsoft will want people to buy the new console AND buy new games for it, and will effectively want us to ‘move on’. I also believe that there would be complications and thus additional costs in developing a console that is truly backwards compatible.
Having just cracked the 100,000 mark, I was hoping that my Gamerscore and thus my achievements would carry over to the new console, but again this may be overly complicated and costly for Microsoft. Another problem with the suggestion of keeping both the old and new console is the issue of Gold subscriptions; would there be a need to have a subscription for each console, or would one cover both?
My three biggest wishes in relation to the new console have always been the keeping of the physical gaming disc, Blu-ray compatibility and backwards compatibility. I would strongly suggest that only two out of three of my wishes are likely to be granted. I would also suggest that I will not be alone in strongly considering the nature and quality of the opening line-up of games for the new console before deciding whether to rush out and pre-order the new console. If the opening line-up doesn’t grab me, I’ll wait until there is a catalogue worth investing in. I very much doubt that the shortages experienced during the first few months upon the release of the 360, will be to the same level for the next console, and I for one will keeping hold of my 360 console even after the release of the next console.
CunningSmile on 13 Feb '13 said:
I'll hold my hand up and admit I forgot the Wii, but the quick google search I ran before writing my original article showed that a large number of PS2 games weren't BC on the original PS3. If it's wrong I'm blaming my sources.
Dave101 on 13 Feb '13 said:
have any of you added up all the dlc cost you have on your hard drive? mine is over £500 with full games downloads. I will flat out not buy a new machine if there is no compatibility. people are talking up the 720 as a miracle of nature but the quality of graphics on skyrim et al is enough for me for at least the next forever. unless they bring out wii-style concepts THAT WORK!
ps. i use the wii bc for gamecube all the time. slimline ps3 wont do ps2 games, does to ps1, ps2 games can be 'bought again' through psn.
fracturedrich on 13 Feb '13 said:
I will stay true to xbox and buy the new console on day 1,but i have a lot of backlog to get through i will just keep my old 360 until the transition is complete then give it the kids,oh and i wont be buying many day 1 this year,whats the point if you cant play them on the new system.
SilentDark on 13 Feb '13 said:
You kids today, always wanting more. In my day a console ran one set of games and we liked it. You kids with your mybooks and facespaces, no respect I tells ya.
In seriousness though I don't see that much of a big deal, just keep your old consoles and use them. there will come a time when there will be enough choice on the new console that keeping the predecessor seems pointless because you'll never play it.
Of course you could be like me and just wait two or three years for all the kinks to be ironed out and a good selection of games to become available.
GHOSTY05 on 13 Feb '13 said:
Well I hope this is not true as I too have at least 250 games!!
However I will still buy the new console and if need be keep my 360.