Jason Stettner of Gamerheadquarters writes; "Ever since its announcement there's been a ton of hype involved with the release of Xbox 360 titles on Xbox One through backwards compatibility"
They are new in the sense that if you haven't played them then they would be new to that person. Like pretty much all the releases for the PS4 and XB1 would be new to me seeing as I don't have either system yet.
Now while many would say Ryse and KZ Shadowfall are old, they would be new to me. And when I do get the PS4 and XB1 then I will have quite a bit of titles to choose from to play.
The beauty of gaming on your own time is there is no rule that says you must play games when they come out. I may miss out on the new release in terms of released to the public but they will be new to me when i get to play them for the first time.
I recently played Xcom for from 360 on X1 thanks to GwG and I have to say that is one fantastic game. So fantastic in fact that I tried to play Xcom 2 for my PC. If it wasn't for BC (and GwG) I would have never played Xcom and passed on it's sequel when it finally releases for Xbox One.
Same can be said for Red Dead, heard nothing but praise but never played it. With it cheap and my 360 officially retired this is a great way for me to try it out.
That's great but just cause you never played any of those games before doesn't make them new released games. That's like me saying I saw back to the future on Netflix last night and i never seen it before so its new release.
P.s you never played red dead!? What!? Awesome game. You are going to love it
"...but just cause you never played any of those games before doesn't make them new released games."
I never said they should be considered newly released games. But they are new experiences for me.
As soon as I tear myself away from Overwatch I'm going to jump on some Red Dead
@gangsta_red And thanks to Netflix, I've been watching the original A Team (car flip!) and MacGuyver (80s cheesy good), as well as a bunch of old Japanese movies.
Also, if you have a good PC, look at the humble bundles that go on every so often. I got Xcom 1 a while back with like 4 or 5 other games for like $4.
@Gangsta- DAMN! Get off N4G and go play Red Dead please!
One of the best games last gen! Was just a masterpiece! I actually personally like Red Dead more then GTAV in regards to its story.
Both are great games, but Red Dead just hit it out of the park. I was thinking about replaying it, but just have no time at the moment.
I agree with Sparta too, not playing a game doesn't make it a new release, that just makes zero sense.
Damn homie it must have been a treat to play red dead for the first time, wish I could start over.
To be honest, with so many games coming out left and right and a huge back catalog (thanks From Soft for this) I can never see my self playing BC games. I mean never.
Hell i still havent finished Alien Isolation and Witcher 3 (thanks again From Soft!) While just barely finishing U4 twice!
In case I havent made my self clear: BC is useless to me.
Thanks From Software for taking 3 gaming years off my life and still going strong.
@ Sparta, not a child of the 90's I assume. "If you haven't seen it, it's new to you!" old NBC(?) slogan.
Gangsta never mentions new, gets slaughtered.... Sparta cannot read, gets praise....
Red Dead was so good, you completely forget what the hell you are doing.... sometimes following gameplay, then you start trying to shoot vultures and get completely sidetracked...... awesome....
Don't let the fancy graphics or the fact it's brand new trick you into thinking they're more worth your time than some of the older games out there. There are quite a few games from last gen which are better than anything released this gen so far....including Bloodborne.
Not that the new games aren't also great, but your missing out on some great experiences just to experience the latest thing available.
RDR is one such game. If you've already played it though, fair enough. Maybe one day you'll be caught up in your backlog. Personally, despite a huge backlog, I play what strikes me when it's time to start a game, and my backlog will never go away...particularly if I only stick to the newest thing available.
Wait....so there are people who agree??? Lol....holy mother of god.
So does this confirm that the Xboxone is just a wanna be 360? How are we calling old 360 games new xbo games?
But the same people turn around and say remasters don't count as a this gen game. Lol wow the goal posts have been moved so much this generation.
"How are we calling old 360 games new xbo games?"
Absolutely no one is calling old 360 games new Xb1 games.
"But the same people turn around and say remasters don't count as a this gen game."
Lol...Exactly who are these same people?
Gangsta, you got balls to say that here.... How many times has Tlou remastered been used in the almighty 'Sony wonderful exclusives' list????
@darth, no matter how you spin it they are not new games , period.
Don't care if it's ryse or shadow fall.
What about for people that never owned, played Red Dead Redemption last Gen and owned a XB1? That sounds new to me. Just like PS4 owners claiming Remasters of God of war 3 and TLOU are new games to them because they never played those games before.
Red Dead Redemption sold 14 million on a combined 170 millions of last gen consoles. Seems like there are many that haven't played it yet. If this game was on PS4, no doubt fans of that system will say it is new too. Why so salty over people claiming RDR is a new release?
I know its fashionable now-a-days for people to redefine things to suit their purpose, but "new release" has a specific definition. It means something new for the general public at one time. Just because people haven't played [fill in the old game here] doesnt make it a "new release". It makes it a game that person (or those people) never played. And its great that they can now experience the game, but that doesn't make it a "new release"
Example: I just showed my 7 year old twins "The Wizard" for the 1st time. It was new to them, but it was not a "new release" since it came out in 1989.
When Rise of the Tomb Raider is released on PS4 later on this year, that is not a new release on PS4?
When Rocket League was released on XB1 earlier this year, that wasn't a new release on that platform?
Red Dead Redemption is no different as it is the first time it is playable on Xbox One.
I don't see salt, just questionable semantics.
The very fact it's marketed as a BACKWARDS compatible game implies it's not new. This isn't a remaster or feature enhanced like HaloMCC or GearsUltimate. It's just backwards compatibility.
BC is cool but lets not lose our heads here, although looking at some of these articles I'd say it's probably too late.
Rise of TombRaider has never been on Playstation before. Rocket League was never on Xbox before. You're comparing apples to oranges. RDR is a Xbox 360 game from 6 years ago that you can slip into your XBox One and keep playing, then slip it back into your 360. Its still Xbox. You're not buying it again. It's backwards compatible. Even if I were to buy the PS1 Spyro on my PS3 for the first time, that wouldnt make it a new game. No one's gonna review it again on metacritic
"When Rise of the Tomb Raider is released on PS4 later on this year, that is not a new release on PS4? " -- No
"When Rocket League was released on XB1 earlier this year, that wasn't a new release on that platform?" -- No
Rise of the Tomb Raider on PS4 & Rocket League on XB1 will have new places to play those games but they won't be NEW releases (since they were already available). And if you didn't play them at their original release its because you CHOSE not to.
Same with Red Dead Redemption...The people who didn't play it on PS3/360 could have, they just didn't. That doesn't make the game a "new release" again.
I bought Earthbound on Wii U and
I never played it before,I bought PC Geijin for my PC Engine Never played it before does that make them new games? Nope.
Both released in 1989 1995 it's technically and factually old games.
Only my experience are new.
Some people just don't know which year they're living lol.
@TheHorseTamer- what about them?
They are merely playing an old game.
New release, means it newly released.
Are you people literally disregarding the EXACT definition of the words? LMFAO!
No, just no. That isn't how that works and it seriously makes zero sense.
@TheHorseTamer There is nobody out there with an Xbone that didn't have a 360. Well maybe there are like 2 people. For people like us the Xbone and its BC are useless. I have zero 360 games I can make use of on an Xbone console.
And this "new to me" thing you have all just made up right now with this article is hilarious. Nobody ever said a remaster on PS4 is a brand new release "because I didn't play it anyway".
Again, its not a big deal as you all make out. It is pretty obvious when this "must have, definitely a big deal, game changer, feature" didn't even help the Xbone sell more PS4s in the US during Xmas 2015.
"When Rise of the Tomb Raider is released on PS4 later on this year, that is not a new release on PS4?"
It's a new release on the PS4, but I haven't seen any PS4 gamer willing to admit that it's a new release, and most of the contention surrounds the possible pricing as a new release game when it does release.
"When Rocket League was released on XB1 earlier this year, that wasn't a new release on that platform?
Red Dead Redemption is no different as it is the first time it is playable on Xbox One."
Yes, on that platform. That doesn't make it a new release. It makes it an previously released game that is now available on another platform.
It can have the same effect as a newly released game for someone that hasn't played it before, but beyond that, it's can be more likened to a timed release or a remaster depending on the circumstances.
Guess I'm one of the two. I have an X1 and never got a 360. I don't find the feature useless, because I can either purchase a retail copy, or simply download it from the xbox store, and it will give me the chance to go back and play some games that peaked my interest on the 360.
I have yet to do so,because I have a tremendous backlog, and a lot of times I do have many of the games I would want to play in my PS3 library as well. But it's still there for when I'm ready to use it.
Other than that, yeah, Horse's reasoning doesn't actually line up with the actual definition of the term. Maybe from a retail outlets perspective, but certainly not by any gamers perspective that I've seen. Hopefully this doesn't become a new thing the Xbox fan boys start using for their arguments.
Its new to me.
I'm finding it very average so far, the early missions are very tedious but i'm guessing it picks up soon.
Its a great looking game but the controls are really showing their age, for a game with wide open spaces the horse is really awkward to ride.
I haven't noticed any skill tree yet, but hopefully there's a few that make horse riding better.
If I remember correctly there are better horses however the horse is still a bit clunky.
If you have an emulator for Commodore 64 on your computer, those games are "new to me." Yet the system still came out over 30 years ago.
"I haven't noticed any skill tree yet"
No, not every game needs a skill tree...
Add to that the incredibly bland character John Marston who shouts all his lines in the same monotone voice most of the time. Never shows fear, remorse, sadness, happiness even when it calls for it.
And wait until you reach Act 2 at the southern part of the map at Mexico. It will REALLY tests your patience. Its just constantly going east and west over a long narrow map for about 3 hours of the game's story, maybe even longer.
For me its a great game but the unanimous GOTY and overhype that people give it is just baffling.
And yes, you are correct. Yet another game where 10 seconds of using the horse you realise yet again "Shadow of the Colossus, still not beat in this dept", The Witcher 3 being one of the other recent games that comes to mind where I can't even use the horse its that terrible.
So all the remasters of last gen's games should be considered new games as well?
Don't confused new games with new releases. Original Halo was a new game and new release on Xbox. Then when it was released later on on PC, it was a new release on that platform. New game or not, it is irrelevant as the article here is about it being used as a new release on the Xbox one platform. It was released and made BC on July 5th on XB1, so it is a new release on that platform.
The hoops some people on this website go through to try to elevate the status of BC and a last gen game is unbelievable. So because the PS3 originally had BC, Sony should have proclaimed all the old PS2 classics should be considered new releases on that platform?
There's far more downplaying in this thread.
How much money do you think Rockstar is making of of their 6 year old game? About 10,000% more than this time last year?
Hell those games would most definitely be considered "new games" before a BC release would be. Remasters add new elements & refine the game to make it fundamentally changed into a new version of an old game. RDR on BC is just an old game played on a new platform.
"How much money do you think Rockstar is making of of their 6 year old game? About 10,000% more than this time last year?"
That depends, is every XBO gamer buying RDR for the first time or are they just playing their old copies? If it's the latter then Rockstar is making zero money off of it. If it's the former then it's relative to whether gamers are buying used copies, hence no money for Rockstar, or buying it digitally at $7, hence little money for Rockstar.
There's not much "downplaying" going on here, it's just a reaction to an asinine headline, written for that sole purpose. Plainly put, BC games are not "basically new releases" because they are technically old releases. MS has been treating BC as a supplement for the lack of new games on their system, which is fine but let's not throw out common sense entirely.
I never owned a Xbox before and currently have a PS4. When I get my Xbox 1 Slim next month, all the games I had missed on the Xbox platform can be considered new releases for me. Halo Wars, Left 4 Dead, and Halo Reach, Gears 1-3 can all be considered new games and releases for me. Just like people that came over from the XB360 side to PS4 that have never played Uncharted 1-3 and The Last of Us, those are new games to them.
Sure, that can be applied to any number of games that you haven't played before, regardless of if you've owned a platform to play them on or not.
When it comes to RDR though, or other BC titles, those games were already released. It's not like they are re-releasing RDR for BC, so the game is a 6 year old release. You are purchasing the same product that was released 6 years ago.
If Rockstar decided to throw in some new visuals, extra story elements, or anything at all, it could be considered a new release. As it is though, the thing people will download, or buy from a retail store, is the same release it was back when it first came out....thus being an old release that you are just now getting around to.
Heck, if the game just recently went up on the digital store for the purposes of BC it could be considered a new release, because new release implies that it's new to the retail outlet. Something can be a new release for a specific platform, but not when it's the same package that was from the original release.
In this case, it's not even a release for the X1 itself. It's still the same original 360 game, which can now be emulated on the X1.
They aren't "new releases" because they have already come out before. It's silly to say otherwise.
They can, however, like all games, be new experiences to gamers that haven't played them before.
Trying to spin this somehow to mean that old releases are new because you haven't played them doesn't make any sense.
These are old games you never got around to playing. Simple as that. Just because someone hasn't played them doesn't make them new.
Agree, and most people seem to be missing the obvious fact that the release they're buying is the same release they either brought, or have been able to buy since it was a new release six years ago. It's not like it's a reworked game. The download itself has been there for 6 years now, and the retail package you buy in store is the same one that came out 6 years ago....or maybe the GOTY edition which came out 5-1/2 years ago.
Only difference now is that it can be played on a different system through means provided by MS.
Some of the logic here is like saying a DS game is suddenly a new release because the 3DS comes out and can play it. It just never worked like that.
I like your approach. Keep the backlog at the store, is what I always say. I've never experienced a gaming drought on any console.
They may not be new games but the feature is awesome and who doesn't like a second go around in a game to see how you would have played it differently.
Wow look at all the Petty individual who disagree , they must not have this feature on their machine , so instead of complain to the tools that decide what was best for them they take out on those who are positive about said feature . Sad bunch
RDR is 6 years old.
I got nearly every achievement in RDR on my 360, so why would i want to replay it if it's not even remastered?
In no way is it a free game or a new release.
The fact that I can play a 6 year old game without the old hardware is awesome and seeing how it was reasonably price. i had no trouble buying it again .
Not for me. I am able to play all of the 360 games without an X1, my trusty 360 is still going strong. Shoutout to my ps3 as well, last gen consoles are still definitely worth keeping.
IKR! Still gaming on my ps3 from time to time mostly around June-August because of weak releases
I feel ya buddy. I did not get the chance to try Ni No Kuni though. How is it?
JRPG was the convincing I needed. I'll try it out.
Your comment makes my PS3 wanna spring from the death of YLOD.
My Ni No Kuni itching to come out and play for my 2nd run!
The game that turned a non JRPG fan to be one with the genre.
It just that amazing.
Cool Story. But when you want to sell your Xbox 360, it won't be worth anything. And if you decide to keep it, you will have a paperweight once everybody has moved onto PS4 Neo and Xbox Scorpio.
Maybe they will never want to sell it. I won't be selling mine, even if every game was made backwards compatible. I prefer to have control over my game saves instead of relying on cloud storage.
My 360 is still alive and well even though I barely play any games on it. I use it as a streaming device for Netflix hulu and such. Old consoles work out pretty well for cord cutters
@Young you buy consoles and invest your money in games to play them, to turn around and sell them, so you can buy the newer one, then rebut x360 games that you already sold for the new console?
The old 360 wasn't worth anything when XBO came out really. What like $50? Fairly sure the resale costs for systems w/ 80 million units in the wild being sold brand new for next to nothing aren't significant enough to make much of a dent in a new purchase.
Also, the great thing about the 360 & PS3 is that neither require an internet connection. You can play games on the system as long as it functions. Obviously not paperweight status.
Oh noes...we'll never get our money back! The humanity.
You think people that keep their old systems to play their old games care? If they cared, they'd have already sold it.
How much money are people going to get back from those digital purchases of RDR or any other BC game?
How much money are any of those games selling for that are available on BC? Maybe the one or two standouts that is valued higher, but last gen games are mostly dirt cheap nowadays.
My PS3 can play 3 generations of PS software. That to me is worth keeping. If the PS4 only had one generation of BC, I'd still find the PS3 worth keeping. As it stands, MS BC solution isn't even compatible with 1/4 of the Xbox library, so it's not even a complete BC solution, and that will still be the case when Neo and Scorpio come out.
It's only a paperweight if someone doesn't use the system, and for those that partake in older games, keeping the system to do it on is the norm. The full BC PS3 still commands a premium price. Many older systems are worth more than the PS4 and X1.
You seem to basing the premise of your argument on the fact that the market value of the system is one's personal value of the system, and that just because it becomes dirt cheap on the market, that people will have no use for it....despite the fact a person is keeping it is to play their old games.
PS3 and 360 are worth keeping at this point, is $50 really worth it? Did u buy your next gen console to play last gen (non-remastered) games that YOU ALREADY OWN and played?
It's a joke that anyone considers this a new release.
So, ur saying in 18 months his 360 will be a paperweight? I guess in a couple years we will see if he should've traded it in for $50, bc if he waits until Scorpio releases he may only get half that! Hmm...is a $25 loss worth it to be able to play EVERY last gen game (rather than a select few)? Great point!
So if u sold your 360, i assume u sold your 360 games. So u are going to rebuy a last gen game that u already bought and played just so u can play it again?
Yeah, well said.
Yea, i have a PS4 and yet i'm able to play EVERY last gen game, not just 30 select games. You know how? I still own my PS3! The $50 trade-in credit wasn't seductive enough to give it up. Now i can play every last gen game i own!
Is this really how people are going to spin the lack of Xbox One games now? Backwards compatible games are now "basically new releases"?
This is exactly it, there has been an absolute ton of goalpost moving since the start of this gen.
Generic, there are a lot of goal post moved every gen on all sides....countless.
It's that time of the year. Let them be.
Nah, let them spin it. Its just hilarious.
I don't know how you got PEOPLE from one guy's article. I have never ever heard this before.
I think it's more of a jab at all the HD re-releases that ARE being passed off as "basically new releases". Some of them are priced at $40-$60 for a simple HD upgrade.
If you look at the comments above, you'll see that there are people that truly believe that it's a new release because it's new to the Xbox One and some spinning it because it's a "new experience" so it's another game for the Xbox One catalog of games. So yea, PEOPLE and that's what he's implying.
The title, "Xbox Backwards Compatible Games are Basically New Releases" contradicts your 2 sentence summary as HD remasters is not equal to, "New Release" and just a re-release. Also quote, "Crazy in that these old games are being treated as brand new titles all these years later," so even the author is talking about how these "PEOPLE" are treating them as they were new. And with the topic brought up, those people that he mentions are showing up so he's not wrong. Treating an old game from 2010 like it's new from 2016 doesn't make any sense because it's old.
^My comment was not a contradiction but a comparison. I was insinuating that many HD remasters are treated as new releases by the nature of their price structure. By new release I do not mean release of a new game, I mean a re-release that's treated like a new item. I'll get flamed for this but God of war 3 last year was a good example, it was a simple HD upgrade released for $40, which is quite a rip off.
I'm hoping not. I know fan boys can use some extreme stretches of logic to try and make their arguments, but I would hope that the more vocal ones around here who tend to repeat themselves can see just how illogical these statements are.
To me, it seems that they've been claiming they can go back and play their old games for so long now, that they already have the game, so the argument is moot for them. Also to me, the huge surge in RDR sales only proved that it's a great game, and that most people didn't hold onto it when they brought their X1....or never brought it in the first place.
It's such a easy argument to dismantle, and I hope they see that and accept it will be dismantled. If they want to try and use it, then that makes them more trolls than fan boys.
It's the common trend that when some new argument comes up, either from a website or from some forum goer who is actually intelligent enough to form their own arguments(regardless of if those arguments have merits), that the extreme fan boys make it into an ongoing argument that supports their side, and repeat it indefinitely, hoping it catches on, and incite people to argue over the meaning, all the while asserting how they are right, and everyone else is wrong.
It happens for all sides of the console fence, and while Phunky may be jumping the gun on calling out the fan boys, I think some people just expect this to become a trending argument in the console wars.
The answer is "NO". Hope that answers your question.
tl;dr for the article and every comment below and above -
"There is a market for old games that people never played the first time around".