WHats going to happen when Microsoft ends support for the 360?

Rumor around the web is Microsoft is ending support for the 360 in 2015~2016 and then the 360 will not be able to get online anymore. Anyone know if SE plans on bringing FFXI to the new consoles? Right now I dual box on two 360's. There is no way my wife is going to let me buy 2 PC's to keep playing this game when the 360 support ends.

if the xbone has backwards compatibility, it won't be a huge issue. I have heard that they're considering new platforms, though ive also later heard about them falling through (e.g. ps vita port- but that probably fell through because nobody has a vita)

I'm pretty sure a Microsoft rep gave the same response a Sony rep did in regards to the PS4. Something akin to "The hardware is too different to make backwards compatibility possible without overhauling so we decided to forgo such a feature."

Yep, new consoles have no Backwards Compatibility.

Doesn't FFXI kinda already ignore the 360's online infrastructure? Still the only game to my knowledge that works with a Silver account online also.

Well as a person been on xbox for 9yrs and this game from the ps2 days, I will say that microsoft will do the same thing sony did with the ps2 let it run till till last person left then allow developers to run the remaining time on it to the ground, and after the xbox1 debacle i think microsoft going 2 need 2 support 360 for awhile unless E3 shows something, since most the xbox hardcore users are going to ps4. This generation since sony supporting mmos.

On xbox side were waiting see if microsoft got guild wars 2 or diablo 3 exclusive or kotor, or if sony getting them or league of legends , what systems get one the big guns. Since ff14 is back burner right now wish they have free to play elements for ff14 though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaisha

Doesn't FFXI kinda already ignore the 360's online infrastructure? Still the only game to my knowledge that works with a Silver account online also.

---

Yes and no, once inside you need nothing, but when signing in your required to be connected to XBL. You can even DC after your signed in, but when signing in it requires you to be signed in to XBL, so unless they change that it would be impossible because you lack what you need to enter.

New consoles are based on commodity x86 CPU's. It's impossible to build in backwards compatibility, at least a the binary level. On the other hand because it's hardware based on the same uArch as you see on PC's, expect games to be stupidly easy to port over and have better features in general.

I think the gaming industry took a step backwards not making their games backward compatible anymore... I mean Nintendo does a good job with their games and they even created an emulator for their systems so they can sell their older games! I find it very dissapointing that developers don't wish for people to play their older games still...



that or repony up for another copy of the game digitally... but i find that absurd vita failed cause of it imho.

What happens to FFXI on the 360 is probably the same thing that will happen to FFXIV when Sony turns off connectivity for the PS3; S-E is already saying that PS3 players will have to marry their FFXIV account to their PSN account in much the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

if the xbone has backwards compatibility, it won't be a huge issue.

---

Oh, you haven't heard? It's like one of the first things they announced about the XBox one.

Quote:

---

Head of Microsoft's Xbox division Don Mattrick has spoken out to say the Xbox One not featuring backwards compatibility is not much of an issue.

Speaking with The Wall Street Journal, Mattrick said only 5 percent of gamers play past-generation titles on new machines.

Thus, it would not make sense to invest time and resources into creating technology to allow gamers to play older games on the Xbox One, he said.

"If you're backwards compatible, you're really backwards," he said.

The Xbox One will not support Xbox 360 games and Xbox Live Arcade titles players have purchased over the years will not be compatible on the next-generation platform.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puck

Oh, you haven't heard? It's like one of the first things they announced about the XBox one.

---

I really don't give a rats behind about the xbone, I'll never buy one, and I haven't paid attention to any of the news. That's what I distinctly included the word "if" in my post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimsonsky

Rumor around the web is Microsoft is ending support for the 360 in 2015~2016 and then the 360 will not be able to get online anymore. Anyone know if SE plans on bringing FFXI to the new consoles? Right now I dual box on two 360's. There is no way my wife is going to let me buy 2 PC's to keep playing this game when the 360 support ends.

---

Buy one PC and dual box.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

I really don't give a rats behind about the xbone, I'll never buy one, and I haven't paid attention to any of the news. That's what I distinctly included the word "if" in my post.

---

That's why people are informing you, stop becoming aggressive because people reply to your post with information you lacked when making it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

if the xbone has backwards compatibility, it won't be a huge issue. I have heard that they're considering new platforms, though ive also later heard about them falling through (e.g. ps vita port- but that probably fell through because nobody has a vita)

---

Xbox One does not have backwards compatibility. 360 use a tri core Power PC CPU, while Xbox One uses an AMD 8 core x86 architecture. Games written for Power PC will have no way of working on a x86 CPU.

One of MS head executives made a statement that you are backwards if you want backward compatibility as well, so there is your answer.

MS typically takes down the online 5 years after the next system is out the question would be will FFXI be around then?

I can't play Jedi Academy online anymore?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zumi

Xbox One does not have backwards compatibility. 360 use a tri core Power PC CPU, while Xbox One uses an AMD 8 core x86 architecture. Games written for Power PC will have no way of working on a x86 CPU.

One of MS head executives made a statement that you are backwards if you want backward compatibility as well, so there is your answer.

MS typically takes down the online 5 years after the next system is out the question would be will FFXI be around then?

---

It is hard to call anything "typical", when it has happened once before. Maybe it'll be 5 years, maybe it won't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puck

Oh, you haven't heard? It's like one of the first things they announced about the XBox one.

---

well when you make your next gen console unable to be backwards compatabile with every game in the first place of course your gonna see biased results like 5% when your considering backwards compatability, this is also coming from the same guy who said all games should require internet to be played. and that we live in a world where everyone is already connected to the internet (which is hugely false)

You have 2-3 years to save up for a pc. In fact, I bet you can find a friend who has a pc now who will upgrade in 2 years and you can snag his old one for free.

Or really any pc made in the last 10 years will work fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Umichi

I think the gaming industry took a step backwards not making their games backward compatible anymore... I mean Nintendo does a good job with their games and they even created an emulator for their systems so they can sell their older games! I find it very dissapointing that developers don't wish for people to play their older games still...

that or repony up for another copy of the game digitally... but i find that absurd vita failed cause of it imho.

---

There have been rumors that the systems won't be supporting used games. No backwards-compatibility follows this mindset--and, if the rumors are true, it adds up pretty well.

Basically, they want your money. They'll (both) spend you out of being able to change loyalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demon6324236

That's why people are informing you, stop becoming aggressive because people reply to your post with information you lacked when making it.

---

I don't call the "informing" that was conducted informing me:

Quote:

---

Oh, you haven't heard? It's like one of the first things they announced about the XBox one.

---

The way this was written (starting with "Oh, you haven't heard?") struck me as rude sarcasm.

Maybe that wasn't the intention, but that's what it sounded like to me.

Now, if backwards compatibility is easy to do, there's no reason not to do it. that 5% segment of your population will be happy- no reason to upset people if it's easy not to. If you don't switch to a different processor architecture, backwards compatibility is almost effortless. Obviously, that isn't the case in this situation- but if microsoft didn't half-ass backwards compatibility the first time, more people might have used it.

Personally of all the big gaming companies out there, Nintendo is obviously the best when it comes to backwards compatibility, if they can turn a console that uses motion sensors to play back into their Gamecube, I don't understand why Microsoft can't do the same.

Personally it should be mandatory that consoles are backwards compatible to a certain extent, they could still be making money off of 360 games long after 360 service ends.

What do you mean by "turn a console that uses motion sensors to play back into their gamecube"? The Wii is a gamecube on speed, with motion controls attached. That's why it can play gamecube games, not because of some Nintendo Hocus Pocus magic.
The PS4 and Exbone are not PS3s and 360s on speed, they are completely different architectures, and that also very apparent when you look at the difference in power between PS2-3 and 4 and between the GC, Wii and WiiU.

Quote:

---

What do you mean by "turn a console that uses motion sensors to play back into their gamecube"? The Wii is a gamecube on speed, with motion controls attached. That's why it can play gamecube games, not because of some Nintendo Hocus Pocus magic.

---

More accurately, it's easy for the Wii to have a gamecube mode because the Wii uses the same archetecture. The Wii U has Wii compatability easily because again, it has the same archetecture- just a faster CPU, better GPU, more memory, etc. It honestly puzzles me why the other console makers felt the need to reinvent the wheel with a special archetecture for each generation, rather than just using the same thing and improving upon it.

Anyway, you're right, it's not hocus pocus magic- the compatibility was there because little work was needed to allow it. I'm sure if Microsoft wouldn't have to have gone to great lengths and considerable investment to do it, they would have done it- because any extra segment of customers you can reach, even if it's small, is worth reaching if the cost is low enough to justify it.

Well you're not gonna find out if a certain architecture is better than an older architecture without actually testing it out. There isn't really *that* much innovation going on at the x86 front. They're just following the same paradigm that "american muscle cars" do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirage

Well you're not gonna find out if a certain architecture is better than an older architecture without actually testing it out. There isn't really *that* much innovation going on at the x86 front. They're just following the same paradigm that "american muscle cars" do.

---

Well most of us are on x64 systems now- but that's not to say there isn't been any innovation within the archetecture, there's been all sorts of CPU technologies added to boost performance in various situations. IMO, the only really big innovation likely to come in the mid term is quadratic computing (if/when they can prove that their chips are actually doing that).

The PS3's unique archetecture was purpose-built from the ground up for what the PS3 was designed to do- but in the end, that only made it more difficult to develop on. Was it really worth it?

Backwards compatibility was extremely iffy on the PS3 and xbox (moreso the latter), and I think that's the real reason it was so underutilized. If every game worked and didn't have problems,

On the Wii U, the only Wii games that don't work at all are the ones that require the dance pad, since the Wii U doesn't have the gamecube controller ports (If it did have them, they would work perfectly), and the small number of games that actually used Wii Connect24 will no longer be able to use that functionality- that's the entire extent of incompatibility.

I've always had trouble believing backwards-compatibility is the issue they make it out to be. Simply put, they've this idea that there's little money to be made in old markets, so why bother. I know the differences in hardware, and more importantly, hardware architecture. It just doesn't seem like backwards compatibility could be an issue at all, if they set out with that feature in mind, and when you're replacing a system, that has to be one of the first topics you address, as a compny.

In Sony's case, remember that the first PS3s were backwards compatible.

There are rumors that neither company's system will play used games and this seems more in that vein. Current-gen systems' games don't have the checks in place, nor-likely-a unique id in each copy of the software. Nixing backwards compatibility allows them, so they think, to rake in the dough.

What they don't realize is that many people would rather spend $40 on 4 used games at gamestop and return/share/resell them than $70, or even $40 (lol that won't happen) only to find out the game was overhyped and the 100 hours of story was marketing bs and the game is done six hours later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alhanelem

Well most of us are on x64 systems now- but that's not to say there isn't been any innovation within the archetecture, there's been all sorts of CPU technologies added to boost performance in various situations. IMO, the only really big innovation likely to come in the mid term is quadratic computing (if/when they can prove that their chips are actually doing that).

---

Most of us are on x86-64. It's a 64-bit extension of the x86 architecture, not a new architecture. The processors still have most of the old gunk in them that is required to execute 32 and 16 bit code, and that is a bit of wasted space if you're gonna use the processor it in a system that will never use these features. Aka consoles.

Also, the Cell architecture was not meant to only be used in PS3, but it turned out that way because it was perhaps not as good as they had hoped. There were a few servers made by IBM that utilized it, and some of Sony's TVs used Cell CPUs as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmnysValefor

I've always had trouble believing backwards-compatibility is the issue they make it out to be. Simply put, they've this idea that there's little money to be made in old markets, so why bother. I know the differences in hardware, and more importantly, hardware architecture. It just doesn't seem like backwards compatibility could be an issue at all, if they set out with that feature in mind, and when you're replacing a system, that has to be one of the first topics you address, as a compny.

---

It's to strongly encourage you to buy the lackluster launch titles rather than just buy the system, play the games you already have, and wait for the truly good games to come later. It's also so they can port last-gen games over as downloads and have you repurchase them if you want to play them in 4k HD on your new system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmnysValefor

Current-gen systems' games don't have the checks in place, nor-likely-a unique id in each copy of the software.

---

PS3 was technically capable since all Blu Rays have a unique serial number printed to each disc (this was when they announced it as a format) they just never pulled the trigger on utilizing those serial numbers.

Am I the only one left who still believes the PS2 was the greatest system of all time and did everything right?








(Ignoring PS2 limitations with XI)

this is why i didnt keep my launch 360 and wont purchase the xbox one. if live goes down/shuts down your games are paper waits.

As long as enough people still play on the Xbox 360, Microsoft will support the system.

Food for the thought:

A PS2 can play PS1 discs because it has 80% of the hardware of a real PS1 inside (including CPU, memory. sound chips, CD-ROM drive, etc)...

Back compat PS3 units had a PS2 CPU/GPU combo to be able to emulate PS2 games properly. While it could do software only emulation, some games did prove to be too tough to work that way (Try Tekken Tag Tournament on a partial BC console and you will see how slow it plays without a real PS2 CPU)...

FFXI on XBOX only need XBOX Live due to achievements and political reasons (publishing contract)...

All that has been said on this thread is reasonable. And at this point, switching to windows version of FFXI is the sensible/reasonable solution anyway.

Speaks the person who bought "Adoulin no Makyou Kakuchou" for the PS2 in PlayAsia ... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alerith

Am I the only one left who still believes the PS2 was the greatest system of all time and did everything right?(Ignoring PS2 limitations with XI)

---

No Ps2 was a great systems ,but not the best, this is the order. of top 4

1. Dreamcast Amazing games and 10years ahead of it time.
2.PS2 Just all around amazing system and alot of games, but nothing really inventive, but dvd drive added.
3.NES Put the arcade games in are home even though look weaker then arcade side.
4. Atari First really mass appeal video game console.

Then after that can let the console war go on.

It was all over after Super Nintendo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sc4500

No Ps2 was a great systems ,but not the best, this is the order. of top 4

1. Dreamcast Amazing games and 10years ahead of it time.
2.PS2 Just all around amazing system and alot of games, but nothing really inventive, but dvd drive added.
3.NES Put the arcade games in are home even though look weaker then arcade side.
4. Atari First really mass appeal video game console.

---

According to your butt, yeah. ;)