Spencer Suggests Buying Xbox One AND Keeping Your 360
by Wokendreamer 9 months ago
It was disappointing to hear we would not be able to play Xbox Live Arcade games on the Xbox One. It was not surprising, but it was disappointing. Backwards compatibility is one thing, but regardless of how anyone feels about that it seems a bit unfair to have a console using the exact same login and account without being able to access previously-purchased material.
Well good news, everyone! Phil Spencer has the solution for everyone!
Those games will continue to run on your Xbox 360 for as long as your Xbox 360 runs... The box is not backward compatible and we think for somebody who invests in a large digital library that you want to keep your [Xbox 360]. Keep that as a vibrant part of the ecosystem.
Microsoft's answer to people wondering about all the money they have put into Xbox Live Arcade and similar DLC not moving to the Xbox One is to just keep your Xbox 360.
I think Microsoft has missed one of the points of making a new console.
The point of making a new console is upgrading. It brings new hardware, new capabilities, and new games. In the past, when a new console has come out it has signaled the beginning of the end for the previous one. The upgraded hardware and capability renders the older one obsolete, and it falls to the wayside.
This time, Microsoft has pointedly left out a certain functionality from their upcoming console, a functionality the current console has had for years. The company is expressing excitement about the future of their soon-to-be obsolete console, based upon this functionality.
If Xbox Live Arcade and the future development of Xbox 360 games are really so worthwhile and exciting, why are they releasing Xbox One at all? Does Microsoft honestly expect everyone to continue spending money on multiple consoles with the same exclusives just because they have them? Why would I get excited about the inferior console's future with the realization that developers are going to begin moving away from designing for it without serious incentives?
Perhaps more to the point, this calls into question Microsoft's entire concept behind the Xbox One.
The name itself is supposed to signify the console as an all-in-one entertainment center, linking all of the methods of entertainment we want into one system. So why can it not even give me access to games and content I have already purchased from Microsoft? Is it only all-in-one while all-in-one means what Microsoft thinks is most convenient or profitable for them?
Er... Maybe not quite ALL-in-one...
The Xbox One is not the all-in-one system Microsoft calls it, and is trying to disguise that fact by couching their words with enthusiasm for the future while ignoring the logical arguments of the now. It links the things Microsoft wants it to, nothing more or less, and I do not trust one company to link together everything I find entertaining if that same company will not even link in their own products.
On top of all this, Xbox Live Arcade is notoriously problematic for smaller developers and publishers to get games onto.
Microsoft is not particularly famous for working with indie developers to make their games successful, and the continuing attitude towards Xbox One does not seem likely to inspire them to go flocking to the company to make more games for their systems, new or old.
The good news, Mr. Spencer, is I will be taking your advice. I will be keeping my Xbox 360 and, hopefully, enjoying it for years to come. I will, however, not be buying a second console from a company so out of touch as to think I want to have the all-in-one console and its predecessor.
Not being able to recognize the logical fallacy in that vision is more than enough reason for me to get off the Xbox train here.