JumPeRJumPzZ
Banned
which are? So far we mostly have 30fps.. which dont run that great.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Xbox One Backwards Compatibility Thread: Everyone wants it, no one uses it
- Thread starter Banjo-Kazooie
- Start date
which are? So far we mostly have 30fps.. which dont run that great.
AgentOtaku
Member
Yeah, how does Lego Star Wars run?
It was an unlocked 60fps with tearing on 360... Before TT starting locking all console releases to 30fps w/ motion bur
It was an unlocked 60fps with tearing on 360... Before TT starting locking all console releases to 30fps w/ motion bur
MightyHedgehog
Member
Looks like more than a third from the current list are 60fps to me. Most games from last gen were not 60fps to begin with and most of those were XBLA titles on X360. The non-60fps games were mostly non-locked 30fps games and many of those had screen tearing of varying amounts. Is this some kind of expectation that X1 BC cannot handle 60fps games or just the high end/AAA 3D titles that run at that framerate? There weren't many of those last gen, and most were 2D games when they weren't 3D one-on-one fighters, the mainline Forza franchise installments and a select few other racers, like Burnout Revenge and Paradise, and some of the FPS games, like RAGE and the CoD franchise (which mostly weren't locked 60fps either).
JumPeRJumPzZ
Banned
Some Arcade games? Sure. But we havent seen a AAA 60fps game yet. And i dont think that this will run very well. Especially when the Emulator still has input lag issues.
MightyHedgehog
Member
CoD BO1 is due, and I assume more than just that one is right behind. It's hard to think of many BC candidates that were what people consider AAA and running at 60fps made last gen to start. Who knows whether input latency issues will be addressed, but most games since last gen were built to withstand it with standardized wireless controllers and online play being the norm in addition to them just generally being unlocked 30fps games, anyway. BC is still early and there may be considerable jumps in performance to come that deal with that, but most of the issues with performance right now seem to stem from enforcing a locked V-sync on games that needed to tear in order to maintain their average framerates and levels of input latency on the X360. If MS allows games to soft-lock, or simply stop forcing V-sync, perhaps under user-control, I think we'll see a lot of near-identical performance during gameplay and better than that when looking at how cutscenes regularly run better under backward compatibility to date.
OttoSporteman
Member
Alan Wake American Nightmare was updated and is now unplayable.
Beer Monkey
Member
It's worth noting that the difference between wired and wireless input latency on the 360 is less than a frame.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0mDwAmQL8s
MightyHedgehog
Member
Cool. I'm aware that the latency is small, but I was just pointing out that, compared to previous generations, input latency is something that has become a greater consideration that can affect the game from its very development process because so many relatively new factors have been introduced to the expected conditions that an average user will encounter. Networked gaming and fixed panel display timings have done the most to soften the action timing that could have been be required in past generations when the stock controller was wired, the display was a lagless CRT, and the game's players all localized to one unit. Most games back then were 60fps to boot, so we had much crisper feedback on control on the average game. Today's AAA game is mostly 30fps, networked, and played on displays that probably add an average of two frames of delay, depending on model and settings. Add to that, most AAA games are much less hardcore about precision timing in action than games of old. The added input latency of emulation will probably go unnoticed by most for most games simply because most games are latency-tolerant to begin with.
AgentOtaku
Member
Still waiting on Burnout Paradise and Tekken Tag 2!
I get the feeling that MS have ditched monthly announcements because they can't even manage to get a reasonable number of games out of the door in the given time
I feel the same way
I REALLY hope that isn't going to just silently go away cause they just figure its not worth the effort anymore...
WouldYouKindly
Banned
It didn't stop them from releasing reach or gears 3 now did it? both were severely broken yet they got patched because of feedback..
I'm not ignorant I understand the purpose of Q&A. I'm just saying people found away to play the thing. it was obviously ready enough to play test just release the thing. The state reach and gears 3 was released in was no better rdr was. they ran like absolute shit at times but yet they were played feedback was herd games was patched that's the approach they should go in.
You bc warriors are getting out of hand if one negative thing gets said there is nothing but shit posting for pages. Bc as a whole is still a mess no 360 store tab yet (I know it's coming *yawn*) they moved from monthly updates which was sup par at best to now they will release as ready which to my knowledge we haven't got a single one. I'm sorry if you don't see that it's failing but it is.
Edit
And just for the record I could give 2 shits about rdr(played it on ps3 great game just not what I want from bc) now if it was crackdown on the other hand...
MightyHedgehog
Member
Most 360 games most certainly were not 60 fps.
I know, I was referring to the generations before last when we had a greater proportion of 60fps titles.
WhiteRabbitEXE
Member
Your stance requires that Microsoft somehow didn't know either game had performance issues, which is absurd. The issues were readily apparent to everyone, and they surely were to MS as well. The issue wasn't that MS didn't know, but rather that both Reach and Gears 3 were rushed to release before they were ready because of demand/promises.
The idea that MS should just do away with QA before release altogether is absurd, because releasing a flood of poor perfoming games helps no one, and just sours people on both the feature and MS.
Also, lol "bc warriors" holy fuck.
dammit. FU MS.
WouldYouKindly
Banned
Obviously I'm not saying it clear enough. the game was leaked this much is fact.people that were not testers played said game again fact. Just release it I'm not saying every game gets rushed and released I'm saying these have already been played by probably thousands of people. whats the point of holding them back now? All that's gonna cause is more pissed off people.its Going to even further sour an already sour experience. It's really a lose lose for us and Ms. I understand they want to release a good working title but they already fucked up by the tester loop hole. The rdr thirst is real for most people it's like what 3rd in voting? You'd think they would just let it go and release it.gamers will just continue to get more pissed off and the service will continue to suffer.
WhiteRabbitEXE
Member
You're plenty clear, you're just not making good points. Some people playing a title that was not meant to be released, that is not ready to be released, that is not officially supported, is not a reason one should have to fully release software that is not meant to be released in its current state, that is not ready to be released in its current state, and is not supported in its current state.
While a thousands might be willing to use an exploit to play software not ready for primetime, that doesn't mean it's acceptable for millions to release particularly poor performing software. Yes, they did it before with Reach and Gears 3, but again, the reaction was overwhelmingly negative, and MS doesn't want that again.
Besides, we don't even know if these titles are actually approved by their publishers. They've been made available to MS testers, and that's all we know.
It's not like Microsoft needs the approval of the publisher first to release it officially...
You can demand what and how long you want. The publisher is the bottleneck in backwards compatibility.
WouldYouKindly
Banned
If they are play testing it its already approved that's common sense.
Again I could give to shits about rdr honestly. My point is the game was leaked go ahead and let it be. They are just causing more negative outlook for bc taking it away.
Anyway I'm not gonna say anything anymore until at least Alan wake and crackdown gets announced or released or leaked or however the fuck ms decides to handle them.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
It's hardly common sense that it's been approved. Given that MS is well aware that this game is one of the top requested titles it's perfectly plausible that MS went ahead and started working on it such that once it did get approved it would be ready to go. If creating the emulator is as easy as MS claims then no reason they couldn't have started working on it.
WouldYouKindly
Banned
That's sounds like a lawsuit to me. Play test a game ONLINE that's not been approved in hopes of getting approved and then let thousands of people find a loop hole to play said game. Go through all that risk for hopes? Get outta here it's approved period they wouldn't touch it let alone go online with it if it wasn't otherwise. Again common sense.
Cool I'll give it some more time this weekend. Don't know why I found the controls so different to last time.
The test wasn't public, we weren't supposed to find out and they're probably playing those games online to test other features like party chat, screenshots, clips, cross-play with 360, game hub.
They test online all the time, trust me, just because you don't find out it doesn't mean they don't.
RunWhiteBoyRun
Member
A lawsuit because you, or others, didn't get in on the glitch? That is pretty petty.
I would buy an HD remake of RE5. That game still looks great even on the old PS3 and 360. I just love the game in general as well.
I think he means Rockstar suing MS because Rockstar didn't give them permission to put it on BC, which would never happen, because they are in business together and make eachother a lot of money. To go to court about something that's already been playable for 6 years and is getting a free service to make even more sales, doesn't seem like a big deal.
AgentOtaku
Member
Did u try relaunching it?
Mine wouldn't as well as it was looking for the disc.... But then I just tried again and it went thru fine
RunWhiteBoyRun
Member
Okay, thanks. That makes a bit more sense.
Fox Mulder
Member
I feel the same way
I REALLY hope that isn't going to just silently go away cause they just figure its not worth the effort anymore...
They've done the work, but a lot depends on publishers. I can see this ending up where BC titles are being held back for GWG slots or preorders bonuses instead of just dropped for free.
Doug Heffernan
Member
No one needs this. It's a 5 year old game which everyone who liked it has beaten. We want an ES6.
You can add Hitman: Absolution to the "coming soon" list.
http://worthplaying.com/article/2016/2/10/news/98407/
Not going to lie if they properly remastered and tweaked the skills I'd definitely double dip on this.
JumPeRJumPzZ
Banned
I wish Microsoft would talk more open about upcoming games.
This "soon" etc doesnt help when we have this leaks in between...
I hope we will get a meaty bunch of games this month.
This "soon" etc doesnt help when we have this leaks in between...
I hope we will get a meaty bunch of games this month.
I still play older games that I love. As do many others. It would sell like hotcakes.
lohankain
Member
Lego Star Wars runs at 60fps in XONE.
The only possible way I could see a lawsuit coming from Rockstar to MS, is if R* was already in the process of making a RDR HD remake and MS just went ahead without permission and released RDR on BC.
Hey, that's not fair! I haven't got around to it yet!
One of these days I'll start Daggerfall, I swear
if you're an adult gamer with a job, there's not even enough time to play all the great brand new games coming out let alone replay 200 hours of a game you already put 200 into. Come on.
haha!
I am, but how about leaving that decision up to the individual? If you have no interest, then... don't buy it!
because doing so could delay a brand new game since there are only so many people working there.
They already admitted to porting the game over to Xbox One as a test. It would not take too much effort and would not delay the next Elder Scrolls, lol. The fact of the matter is that the game is huge and there is money to be made in it. But will they even do it? We shall see.
you were talking about a remaster, not BC
I know. Bethesda admitted that they have already ported it to the Xbox One as a test. Furthermore, they have other teams that could finish the job and port it to both systems. It would not detract from the next Elder Scrolls.
At any rate, to think that remastering Skyrim is a bad idea after how successful all of these remasters have been is nuts. It is amazing that they have not done it already. But who knows if they will? It would certainly be a success if they did, though.
Similar threads
- Poll