It would be nice if you could point to the post that say BC is bad. Just one will suffice.
Averages out to about only 5 hours per console. And when you include about all the free BC games MS was throwing at people, the number is extremely underwhelming. Wonder why they didn't give out how many people are actually using this? They definitely have the number, but I guess no MAUR number for everyone this time. Maybe they reached the character limit in the PR.
Celebrate the little victories I suppose.
Yes, means it pretty much almost irrelevant.
Only MS will released a pointless pr statement. Just like their NPD statements this gen.
so a 5 hour average per console over an 8 month span. This seems like worried news for fans of backwards compatibility.
so a 5 hour average per console over an 8 month span. This seems like worried news for fans of backwards compatibility.
Averages out to about only 5 hours per console. And when you include about all the free BC games MS was throwing at people, the number is extremely underwhelming. Wonder why they didn't give out how many people are actually using this? They definitely have the number, but I guess no MAUR number for everyone this time. Maybe they reached the character limit in the PR.
Averages out to about only 5 hours per console. And when you include about all the free BC games MS was throwing at people, the number is extremely underwhelming. Wonder why they didn't give out how many people are actually using this? They definitely have the number, but I guess no MAUR number for everyone this time. Maybe they reached the character limit in the PR.
Stop it guys; you're trying too hard! It's not 5 hrs per console because that assumes 100% of Xbone owners have used BC, which is not the case. I would not be surprised if it's more like a quarter of owners.
per console absolute is stupid....
imagine same stupidity applied to tie ratio for a game....
you'll need 10 millions units minimun to make it appear not bad in absolute (and more the more console you sell)
of course not, but we do not know the tie ratio. 100 million is a meaningless number, so breaking it down into averages gives a better idea of use. 5 hours average across all consoles means the average xbox one owner has not completed a single backwards compatible game. This isn't the same as the tie ratio for a single game as this is for all backwards compatible games.Stop it guys; you're trying too hard! It's not 5 hrs per console because that assumes 100% of Xbone owners have used BC, which is not the case. I would not be surprised if it's more like a quarter of owners.
If the argument is that a large percentage of the Xbox One population doesn't use BC, that is the opposite of the argument that BC is needed because lots of people really want it.
Isnt Xbox 360 BC digital? I'm under the impression that if you insert a Xbox 360 disc in a Xbox One, it will download the game.
I'm pretty sure if they would have supported BC at launch things would have turned out much differently for Microsoft
That's not true.of course not, but we do not know the tie ratio. 100 million is a meaningless number, so breaking it down into averages gives a better idea of use. 5 hours average across all consoles means the average xbox one owner has not completed a single backwards compatible game. This isn't the same as the tie ratio for a single game as this is for all backwards compatible games.
This just isn't a good look for backwards compatibility, however like I said, on the plus side backwards compatibility should be standard going forward anyway thanks to x86 changeover
so a 5 hour average per console over an 8 month span. This seems like worried news for fans of backwards compatibility.
Still, this gen scrapping backwards compatibility would probably been the better choice. Microsoft and Sony both made the right move shifting over to x86, and this made backwards compatibility completely impossible on PS4, and is costing microsoft a lot of time and effort to make each game they can available on BC. Time that is possibly better spent elsewhere.
The bright spot is that with the shift to x86, forward consoles should generally be backwards compatible by default
Averages out to about only 5 hours per console. And when you include about all the free BC games MS was throwing at people, the number is extremely underwhelming. Wonder why they didn't give out how many people are actually using this? They definitely have the number, but I guess no MAUR number for everyone this time. Maybe they reached the character limit in the PR.
That a small, no?
I mean 5 hours per Xbox One since BC was released is like less than 1 minute per day for each Xbox One.
Even if you cut the BC use to 1m console it will continue small.
If you cut it to 1M consoles then you're looking at 41 minutes per day per console. Couldn't agree with you more, is anyone even using this thing? 41 minutes in a day per console is a joke. Such a small number, why is MS even wasting their time?Even if you cut the BC use to 1m console it will continue small.
thats a valid pointThat's not true.
72% of the games currently on the BC catalogue are Arcade, I'm willing to bet most of them can be completed in under 5 hours.
because part of my job is data analytics. This is pretty easy to do some quick numbers and analysis on. There is no "trying", the numbers do not add up to great value on their own. EDIT: For microsoft, but that doesnt include the value of having "backwards compatibility" as a marketing bullet pointMan, people really trying their best here. I have no idea how people have the energy for this.
That a small, no?
bc is great for preservation of console games. i'm glad nintendo and microsoft support some form of physical BC
That is not the point... it small any way you look.And less than 1 minute per day doesn't sound even remotely realistic, does it?
What that even means is out of my mind but that your way to always contribute lolYes. Based on this, MS will soon leave the console business. Truly disappointing numbers.
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
because the changeover to x86 was just an absolute requirement this gen, and emulating PS3 architecture just isnt possible. Even microsoft is struggling to emulate the 360 and having to write specific code for each game that runs on the xbox oneYup.
And something Sony needs to get better at. They used to be good, dont know what made Sony change their stance.
Nope... it is really small.You are trying too hard.
thats a valid point
because part of my job is data analytics. This is pretty easy to do some quick numbers and analysis on. There is no "trying", the numbers do not add up to great value on their own. EDIT: For microsoft, but that doesnt include the value of having "backwards compatibility" as a marketing bullet point
because part of my job is data analytics. This is pretty easy to do some quick numbers and analysis on. There is no "trying", the numbers do not add up to great value on their own. EDIT: For microsoft, but that doesnt include the value of having "backwards compatibility" as a marketing bullet point
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
Ohhhhhh I get where I messed lol thanksYou are trying too hard, and your maths is broken.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
because part of my job is data analytics. This is pretty easy to do some quick numbers and analysis on. There is no "trying", the numbers do not add up to great value on their own. EDIT: For microsoft, but that doesnt include the value of having "backwards compatibility" as a marketing bullet point
thats a valid point
because part of my job is data analytics. This is pretty easy to do some quick numbers and analysis on. There is no "trying", the numbers do not add up to great value on their own. EDIT: For microsoft, but that doesnt include the value of having "backwards compatibility" as a marketing bullet point
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
So, from this PR announcement, we know now that on average an Xbox One owner has used Backwards Compatibility for about five hours during the last eight months.
We also know that since Microsoft actually made an announcement about that usage, they're clearly happy with it's adoption rate.
FYI, pointing out these facts doesn't make me "salty", "desparate", a "hater", or a "downplayer", so for all the posters here enthusiastically showing off their persecution complex, this is not the post you're looking for.
As an analyzer of data you know how misleading a straight average single data point can be.
You have no idea of hours per user of the feature, no idea on trend, no idea on types of games being played.
It's a single data point. And on that you're going to make assessments like you're making?
As someone who looks and analyzes data, you should be one of the first people to come out and say that this data point tells us absolutely nothing of import, and that no conclusions can be drawn from it.
Correct, but I can work with what I'm given to get an idea. Number of users would be the most important number, one which we arent given, however with the number we are given we can still look at how popular it is across the entire xbox one ownership. That look isn't good. 100 hours just isn't a lot.My job is data analysis too, not like that really matters. You and I both know the 5 hours 'average' is completely disingenuous, but without any more information from MS we can't begin to guess averages or the number of owners who have played BC games to any substantial degree.
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
Let me guess, your job is in data analytics.
Correct, but I can work with what I'm given to get an idea. Number of users would be the most important number, one which we arent given, however with the number we are given we can still look at how popular it is across the entire xbox one ownership. That look isn't good. 100 hours just isn't a lot.
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
What that even means is out of my mind but that your way to always contribute lol
So... 100m hours, in one year, across, what? 25 million consoles?
That's 4 hours per console, average, in a year.
100m sounds impressive, but in context? It's not exactly "massive numbers" and proves there's "vague interest" not necessarily "massive demand".
I'm absolutely raining on Microsoft's parade here because it's a pointless figure.
So are there people in here acting like this is bad?
Celebrate the little victories I suppose.
Everyone is happy to line up to continue singing the praises of the most anti consumer company in the industry, which enables them to continue those behaviors. Good stuff, I don't get it either.
So, from this PR announcement, we know now that on average an Xbox One owner has used Backwards Compatibility for about five hours during the last eight months.
We also know that since Microsoft actually made an announcement about that usage, they're clearly happy with it's adoption rate.
FYI, pointing out these facts doesn't make me "salty", "desparate", a "hater", or a "downplayer", so for all the posters here enthusiastically showing off their persecution complex, this is not the post you're looking for.
That is not the point... it small any way you look.
If 1m users tried BC for 30 minutes that is already 30m hours.
How much does it cost MS to implement BC on a title?so a 5 hour average per console over an 8 month span. This seems like worried news for fans of backwards compatibility.
Still, this gen scrapping backwards compatibility would probably been the better choice. Microsoft and Sony both made the right move shifting over to x86, and this made backwards compatibility completely impossible on PS4, and is costing microsoft a lot of time and effort to make each game they can available on BC. Time that is possibly better spent elsewhere.
The bright spot is that with the shift to x86, forward consoles should generally be backwards compatible by default