Xbox 360 fully backwards compatible (?) and leaked brochure!

[Arreat]

Link

Leaked Brochure

[RoxStar]

*Saves Before it gets taken down*

 

Thanks for the information!

[Hermie]

Anyone else notice how all this X360 info suddently has accidently leaked, causing us, the gaming community, to talk about it? Compare the amount of stuff you've seen/heard/read about the 360 the last month to f.ex. what you've seen/heard/read about the PS3...

[Acrylic]

I don't think it's fully backwards compatible, because according to http://www.planetxbox360.com/images/brochure/general.jpg , it says, "top selling Xbox games can be played on the Xbox 260, including Halo 2"

 

I think this is a horrible mistake on MS's part. First, not including a lens (it is lens, right?) that can read HD-DVDs from the beginning, and not making the 360 fully backwards compatible. *sigh*

[RoxStar]

Anyone else notice how all this X360 info suddently has accidently leaked, causing us, the gaming community, to talk about it? Compare the amount of stuff you've seen/heard/read about the 360 the last month to f.ex. what you've seen/heard/read about the PS3...

 

Hey, I was excited

[Jeff]

Now I don't know what to believe...

 

I've heard rumors that it's not backwards compatible, and now it says that it is. And none of it is official, all "leaked." Hopefully this source is true though...

[Astrotoy7]

yes, Ive read all over the place that the x360 is only backwards compatible with certain games, which will be recompiled... One of the selling points of either the N-rev or the PS3 are their backwards compatibility....which begs the question.... what are MS thinking ??? Im glad i'll be able to trade my ps2 in to get a ps3 and still be able to play those ps1/2 titles when the mood arises, same goes if I ever get an N-Rev too... backwards compatibility = good

 

mtfbwya

[Black Knight of Keno]

Feh... Never trust Microsoft people! if the logo will actually be like that and if it's animated on the boot-up sequence of the 360, I would bet some hilarious guy came up with that suddenly shouting: "Let's make the logo rolling! Lets hypnotize people to buy more and more Microsoft products"

Never trust a Microsoft employee, and that shall my new motto.

CAD shall say what I cannot(just insert Microsoft every time they say Windows) :

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/images/comics/20040714.jpg

[MTV2]

brochure looks cool

[TiE23]

Anyone else notice how all this X360 info suddently has accidently leaked, causing us, the gaming community, to talk about it? Compare the amount of stuff you've seen/heard/read about the 360 the last month to f.ex. what you've seen/heard/read about the PS3...

Yes, I belive that Microsoft has someone who is coming up will all of these rumors and stuff. Ourcolony.net and Ilovebees.com anyone? These could be "leaked" on porpose.

[Lynk Former]

It's not just a Microsoft thing, these sorts of things happen with all three companies. It's just the power of the internet working its magic XD

[toms]

From what i understand it is basically going to emulate the XBOX for compatability. And they are basically starting with the most popular games and working their way back to test compatibility... so probably 90% of games will be compatible, but a few obscure ones, or ones that use the XBOX hardware in weird ways, may not work right.

 

Also, as i understand it, you will need the full Xbox 360 with the hard drive for backwards compatibility to work, as most old xbox games will need it.

 

Xbox 360 Standard: $399.99 Gold Xbox Live Subscription: At least $49.99 (Likely more.) Wireless Networking Adapter: $99.99 Second Wireless Controller: $49.99 Two Play and Charge Kits: $19.99 times two. Total: $639.94

Not to mention a new HDTV and all sorts of jive. - Gizmodo

[Lynk Former]

What toms has said is accurate.

[toms]

naturellement...

 

For people's information: The consensus on every gaming web site i've seen is that the $299 "Core version" is a waste of money, and a bad idea on MS's part.

All of them seem to think it will be crippled and a waste of money, and a lot of people think MS is only launching it so it can say its price point is "from under $300" and then talk people into the $400 version once they get instore.

The problem is that all games will have to be designed to work for those few "idiots" [source - 1up] who do buy the core system, so they won't be quite as cool as if they had just released the HD version.

 

Just incase anyone was thinking of getting one...

[toms]

Gamers still reeling from last week's Xbox 360 sticker shock should sit down for this one: Electronics Boutique has announced their Xbox 360 bundle packs for both the premium and the "core" SKUs. Price tag? $700 and $600, respectively.

 

Now, before you go flying off the handle in a fit of consumer outrage, know that these expensive packages include premiums such as four launch games, a second wireless controller, the universal media remote, and more.

 

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143091

[Obi_Kwiet]

Well I know at least on thing on that list is wrong. CoD 2 is comming out for PC too.

[lukeskywalker1]

I found it interesting that a monitor can be used for the 360, but does that all monitors can just simply output HD signals?

 

Hmmm, the Revolution will support monitors too.

 

 

Lets see Nintendo or Sony charge that much. I know nintendo will at the most be $200. PS3 is expected to be at $300.

[Lynk Former]

The PS3 is expected to be a lot more than 300 actually.

[Jeff]

The PS3 is expected to be a lot more than 300 actually.

I had heard this also. Something about that since it was taking over $400 just to make the ps3, it would have to be $400 at least if they hope to make any profit at all. But I heard that quite a while ago, so maybe its not true anymore.

[Lynk Former]

Microsoft is paying people to buy the 360 just as they were paying people to buy the original Xbox as well.

 

It's a strange way of doing things but I can understand it, it's a very long-term way of doing things and seeing as Microsoft makes a tonne of cash from its other dealings, it works for them. However, it's a lot more dangerous for Sony than it is for Microsoft seeing as Sony's competition on many levels are all starting to beat them (overall) in many different fields. For example, Sony is taking a beating in the digital video camera area by Canon and many people are buying other brands of TVs over Sony nowadays. The only thing that has kept Sony afloat lately is the fact that they can still make a good amount of revenue from their music and movies.

 

Microsoft still has to do more than just another "Halo 2" to earn back all the money they'll be losing. It's not apparent but this generation Microsoft and Sony should've made a lot more money than they did, and I don't care if you all think I'm some Nintendo fan boy but Microsoft and Sony didn't make any profit in this generation (PS2, Xbox). However, that doesn't mean that Sony doesn't have the majority of the market, they're just doing it a very high cost.

 

Still talking about consoles selling for less than they're actually worth, Nintendo lost profit because of the GameCube but it wasn't because they were expensive to make, rather that Nintendo didn't sell enough to balance it out. The funny thing is that they sold almost as much as Microsoft, but seeing as Nintendo is Nintendo they were aiming for a higher count.

 

In the end, it seems that Nintendo's profits came from the Game Boy, Nintendo DS and their first party games on various platforms rather than GameCube hardware. There is also news about Sega finally making profit, but it's exaggerated. And since Sega is a division of Sammy, it was Sammy's other dealings that were making the majority of the profit. Either way it's good to see that Sega is surviving in its own way.

 

Finishing off, all three companies will take a loss at first but I'm sure that all three will profit in the end, one way or the other. Profit doesn't necessarily mean money.

[Eva]

I have a feeling some of the features they promise will be stripped for more affordability.= of the PS3.

Huh? 400$ is a lot of money, but majority of people will still be able to afford that price. For what it is, that price is fair for the PS3. Though, I won't be buying, because it's far too expensive for my taste. Still, they won't strip down features just to lower of the price of PS3. Lol, what a strange logic...

[toms]

Its pretty clear that even after stripping out some features Sony are going to be making a loss on PS3 units. Thats not great when its their 3rd generation machine. You wuld think that with the huge install base of the PS2 and the number of games sold (and therefore license payments to Sony) they should have made a profit.

 

MS on the other hand never expected to make a profit on the first generation. They just wanted to break into the console industry and get a foothold (something which i remember a lot of people thinking they would never ,manage). Having gone from nothing to a respected name with 2nd place in terms of install base is pretty impressive in such a short time.

MS aren't daft, their whole business model has always been to get their user base huge, then lock them into regular payments and upgrades. I'm suspect MS is hoping that Live subscriptions will be their main point of profit, that and other services like music downloads, etc..

 

By ripping the Hard Drive out of the lower xbox they will probably limit their losses a bit... but i still think its an odd decisions.. as the casual gamers that are most likely to buy the cheap version are also the ones most likely to want to play their old xbox games.

 

I'd be interested to know if nintendo will make any profit on the Revolution. I suspect that even though they aren't going for ULTRA POWER they will still be lucky to break even at their lower price point. But who knows.

 

It should be pointed out that although everyone now seems to think of Nintendo as less of a corporate monster than Sony or MS, in their time they were just as intent on world domination as either of those two. Infact their excessive licensing costs were part of what drove all their third party develpers into the arms of the competition. Luckily the PSP doesn't seem to have made TOO much of a dent in their portables profits yet, which is what is making up for their low sales in home consoles.

[toms]

A lot of us have been wondering about the Xbox 360's backwards compatibility issue. Microsoft has announced that the Xbox 360 will be partially backwards compatible. What does that mean? Today we spoke with an industry source who shed some light on the subject.

 

One of the rumors floating around is that backwards compatibility will only work with a hard drive, which would have left Core systems out in the cold. As it turns out, that's only partially true. In many cases, the hard drive will indeed be necessary because you'll need an Xbox emulator file to sit on the hard drive (it's still unconfirmed whether this emulator comes pre-shipped on 360 hard drives but it is highly likely the case) and make your Xbox games 360-friendly. However, our understanding is that this isn't perfectly foolproof, and that it may not work in every single case.

 

What's especially interesting, though, is that select premium Xbox titles in the present and future are getting special treatment. We've learned that Microsoft is inviting some developers to make their current Xbox titles backwards compatible for both 360 SKUs -- that the games themselves will contain the Xbox 360 emulation code on them. In fact, certain Xbox titles already contain the code to boot up under emulation on the Xbox 360. Teams from Microsoft are helping developers with the project.

 

But resources are limited, so only triple A titles will get this kind of attention, and only products coming out in the window after the Xbox 360 announcement. Which ones? We have some hints, but nothing we can officially talk about yet. But don't worry, we're on the case.

 

So i'd guess halo 2 will work on both 360 systems, but most games (and all older games) only have a chance on the HD version.

Its all very confusing...

[Lynk Former]

I'd be interested to know if nintendo will make any profit on the Revolution. I suspect that even though they aren't going for ULTRA POWER they will still be lucky to break even at their lower price point. But who knows.

Well the way I see it two things can happen, it will go just as it went with the GameCube, if that happens Nintendo will lose some profit however it will be no real loss seeing as their sales of handheld and first party games bring in the gold.

 

The second thing that could happen is that the Revolution could do better than the GameCube and Nintendo will make a nice profit, either way though, Nintendo will make a profit. But obviously, that doesn't mean that they will take back the market from Sony.

 

Another thing to consider is that the Revolution won't be as powerful as the other two systems. The western folks won't like the sound of that, obviously because most people think raw power = better games. What Nintendo is trying to do is go for efficiency, their goal is to bring powerful games using less power than people would think is needed. This is one of the reasons why the Revolution won't be jumping head first into the HD era, even though Nintendo have said this; it's still not a concrete thing.

 

Either way it is clear that Nintendo hope to release a cost effective console that will be affordable not only to them, but to consumers. Of course, we all know that consumers don't necessarily go for the cheaper brand lol.

 

 

 

It should be pointed out that although everyone now seems to think of Nintendo as less of a corporate monster than Sony or MS, in their time they were just as intent on world domination as either of those two. Infact their excessive licensing costs were part of what drove all their third party develpers into the arms of the competition. Luckily the PSP doesn't seem to have made TOO much of a dent in their portables profits yet, which is what is making up for their low sales in home consoles.

Oh yeah, Nintendo was out of control at the climax of the SNES era and it took Sony to slowly bring them into perspective to show them that they will have to do some things a little differently. Plus when I first heard of the PSP, I was glad that Nintendo would finally get some competition that would live long enough to make Nintendo fight for the handheld arena too.

 

It may sound strange, but it's better to have competition, if 2 companies compete then the consumer will end up benefiting from that competition. Nintendo was ruling like a tyrant all those years ago and that cost them, but lookie, lookie, Sony isn't so different from Nintendo even though they claim to be... Sony is doing exactly the same things Nintendo have done in their past and it could bite them very hard. The Xbox360 is trying to pull a PlayStation 1, and if they're successful, it will launch a good enough hit to Sony to dislodge them just enough from both Microsoft and Nintendo to pounce and take the advantage.

 

Which really is a good thing, for consumers to benefit from all of this, all three companies must be in balance. Right now, it isn't so because Sony is ahead by so much in terms of sales and Nintendo is ahead so much in terms of profits.

[lukeskywalker1]

Yeah, thats right, Nintendo used to have a huge library of 3rd party exclusives back then. I remember stupid liscence deals as well... something about limiting the number of crappy games by limiting the ammount of games a company could release per year (on the SNES). It ended up that some companys would just submit games under "new names." It was complicated.