• 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.

Should Microsoft have announced Xbox One X as a new generation?

VDenter

Banned
No because if it was a new generation games would stop coming out for the regular Xbox One. This is not the case because all games that are developed for the X need to work on the regular model as well. Microsoft abandoning support for the older models would undeniably piss people off who already own a Xbox One. Simply put Xbox One X is not a next generation console and it was never meant to be. It is merely a refresh,same as the PS4 Pro.
 

Kureransu

Member
Full BC will be realised but what's the point of a new generation if you don't make new games for the hardware. You can still keep all your games, be able to play them and even release new games that support a previous gen while on next gen hardware with exclusive next gen games. It's not one or the other. Generations are not dead. I will see a PS5 game box art that only plays on a PS5. Absolutely no doubt.

Or maybe you won't. The architecture of the consoles now are modeled after PC, in which games are made scalable based on specs. I don't see why ps5 wouldn't just be recommended specs, and ps4 be minimal? People are buying the pro and will buy the X just to play the best performing console version available. I think what we'll get next gen is the discontinuation of the base models (slim and S) and the pro and X will still be around and supported as forward compatible. Same thing i feel with the switch. When the next iteration comes out. the current switch will pretty much be the handheld specs of the the current system. After all, software is where all the money is made. They can make iterative upgrades every 3-5 years as it comes cost efficient to always keep a $400-$500 dollar sku, with the previous system hitting the 200-300 price point. By doing this they can simply discontinue the oldest model keeping the systems at a steady entry point of 200-300 bucks, making killer bucks on the older hardware years later.
 

Vinc

Member
That would've been INCREDIBLY short-sighted and destructive for them in the long-term. And people aren't idiots, it wouldn't have helped short-term either.
 
I hope we're done with generations. All games backwards compatible. Each console gets 8 years of new games until is phased out. You can choose to upgrade every 4 (which I would).
 
Or maybe you won't. The architecture of the consoles now are modeled after PC, in which games are made scalable based on specs. I don't see why ps5 wouldn't just be recommended specs, and ps4 be minimal? People are buying the pro and will buy the X just to play the best performing console version available. I think what we'll get next gen is the discontinuation of the base models (slim and S) and the pro and X will still be around and supported as forward compatible. Same thing i feel with the switch. When the next iteration comes out. the current switch will pretty much be the handheld specs of the the current system. After all, software is where all the money is made. They can make iterative upgrades every 3-5 years as it comes cost efficient to always keep a $400-$500 dollar sku, with the previous system hitting the 200-300 price point. By doing this they can simply discontinue the oldest model keeping the systems at a steady entry point of 200-300 bucks, making killer bucks on the older hardware years later.

Because difference between PS4 and PS5 will be so gigantic that you have to severely limit your game design if you have to make PS4 version too. CPU upgrade alone will be huge with going from jaguars to some Ryzen variant. I mean there will be cross gen games like with this gen but only for first two years (just like this gen). I really don't know why people now think generations are dead. Was New 3DS new gen? Was DSi new gen? No they were not.
 
I dont think it would have changed anything since games need to be developed for the lowest common denominator, especially for the 3rd party games. That would have been the ps4.

Yeah youd have exclusive MS games which potentially would look great, but the 3rd party games would all be slightly better ports of ps4 versions.

I honestly dont think it would have been much better than what we will ultimately get with X in November.
 

otakukidd

Member
Here's hoping Microsoft never does "generations" again and that Sony follows suit.

I like the idea that whenever a new more powerful console comes out, my game library doesn't have to get deleted with the new console.

Eventually, there will be a point where Microsoft would say, "alright, new games only work on Xbox One X and Xbox 2020, but will not play on Xbox One S."
So long as they always have 2 options to play new games coming out, I think that will suffice.

It gives the consumer more options and price points to access games, old games will continue to work in perpetuity on newer hardware, and fits in line with what consumers have come to expect from things like cell phones and tablets.
Why do people keep mixing this shit up. Who says new generations can't play older generations games. BC is a thing. These consoles are x86 now. They no longer have a good excuse to cut BC.
 
Why do people keep mixing this shit up. Who says new generations can't play older generations games. BC is a thing. These consoles are x86 now. They no longer have a good excuse to cut BC.

PC has done this literally forever for games and they also end up working on PC for a lot longer.

I dont mind backwards compatibility like MS is doing but when a company doesn't do it (like sony) it really sucks. This would make it so that games will work on whatever platform you buy for much much longer and that to me is a better option.
 

jelly

Member
Because difference between PS4 and PS5 will be so gigantic that you have to severely limit your game design if you have to make PS4 version too. I mean there will be cross gen games like with this gen but only for first two years (just like this gen). CPU upgrade alone will be huge with going from jaguars to some Ryzen variant. I really don't know why people now think generations are dead. Was New 3DS new gen? Was DSi new gen? No they were not.

Yeah, the toaster CPU in comparison to a next gen console will be night and day, you could maybe get away with some early cross gen titles like every gen but even then, they don't always compare and for good reason. If a developer wants to make a game based on last gen specs and scaled up with X/Pro boosts that's fine but it will be a PS4/Xbox One game that plays via BC on a PS5/Xbox 4, nothing more.
 
It would destroy their game sales, since new games would be sold only to a much smaller userbase. Why throw away the +/- 30 million Xbox One users in favor of exclusively catering to a small group that can afford a $500 console? It makes no sense. Sony would have a field day with "You can still play our new games on your current PS4."
 

Kureransu

Member
Because difference between PS4 and PS5 will be so gigantic that you have to severely limit your game design if you have to make PS4 version too. CPU upgrade alone will be huge with going from jaguars to some Ryzen variant. I really don't know why people now think generations are dead. Was New 3DS new gen? Was DSi new gen? No they were not.

Because the signs are pointing to it. We're not talking handhelds, we're talking about $400-$500 systems getting upgrades 3-4 years later that also cost $400-$500. I don't know why you want it any other way. It works well as a whole for the industry. It keeps everything relevant and value high. it's not point in fragmentation at this point. Games as a service is another step in that direction to keep a game's value high over an extended period of time.

Also, I don't think it's going to be as gigantic as you think it'll be. I look at what the Pro is and it's price point, and i can't see them upgrading THAT significantly without a price point that'll be main stream enough.
 

rav

Member
Why do people keep mixing this shit up. Who says new generations can't play older generations games. BC is a thing. These consoles are x86 now. They no longer have a good excuse to cut BC.

Depends on graphics vendors too. Look at OG Xbox.

On the topic:
MS has explicitly said this is a premium XBO product. And they don't want to cut into the long legs of each generation. As revisions continue, the chip yields increase and dies shrink, there are lots of profits to be made at the end of the console generation. Chopping it short 5-6 years would only cut all of those gains short. Those gains are likely what fund the R&D for the next generation.
Also, this is mostly a ram increase, and clock increase, die shrink, and "Furthermore, ESRAM from the base Xbox One is mapped directly to GDDR5 in the new console with no tweaking" Which also is likely to increase chip yields.

We don't know what kind of cost/profit the X has, but for sure the S will continue to have improved gains over rest of the XBO generation life.
 

Kureransu

Member
People were upset, they killed the Xbox early to get a jump start on the next gen. They were incredibly lucky that the 360 was awesome.

Lol, yes they were and it would have lasted a lot longer if it weren't for the mandatory HDD and Nvidia contract.

Microsoft did a great job marketing the 360. some of the hardcore may have been upset, but if they were they got over it fast. it was selling well out the gate and had the whole HD gimmick to ride it into the beast that it was the first few years on the market.
 
Microsoft did a great job marketing the 360. some of the hardcore may have been upset, but if they were they got over it fast. it was selling well out the gate and had the whole HD gimmick to ride it into the beast that it was the first few years on the market.

I wasnt upset at all, i couldnt wait for halo3 on better hardware!
 

kc44135

Member
Why do people keep mixing this shit up. Who says new generations can't play older generations games. BC is a thing. These consoles are x86 now. They no longer have a good excuse to cut BC.

I'm hopeful this is the case and indeed the future of Consoles. I wonder though... people always say that "BC doesn't matter", "everyone wants it, but no one uses it", etc., but is that still true now? If, let's say, MS comes out with X2, and it's BC with OG Xbox, 360, and X1, and Sony comes with a PS5 that just plays PS5 games, does that hurt PS5's sales in anyway? Does it impact their momentum? I think it does, but I'm interested if others think so too. I think the market has shifted in favor of BC Consoles and having game libraries carry forward across generations (even if it's seemingly not helping X1 much atm).

Also, to answer OP's question: LOL, no.
 

rokkerkory

Member
So, thinking about it, should Microsoft have come out and said Xbox One X is a new generation? Would it have generated a lot of hype and caught the competition totally flat footed?

I mean, it is really isn't it? It's a massive step up from Xbox One, did they not announce it as such so not to annoy anybody? Or was it because of the whole "no exclusive games" so it's not a new generation train of thought?

There are no more of the traditional 'generations' as far as Xbox is concerned.
 
It kinda was announced that way.


Then as time passed the reality set in as the hype and mystery of last year turned to facts.



Sticking to XB1 branding also gives them a out in 4 years to make a truly next gen Xbox two
 

AmyS

Member
One X is full blown next gen, but MS take modest approach by calling it beyond generation.

LOL.

No.

It's not powerful enough to be a new generation. Even the leap in GPU power from XBone to Scorpio is only 4.6x.

Scorpio / Xbox One X is a very solid mid-gen upgrade, but not enough to be next-gen with the same basic Jaguar CPU architecture (even with the enhancements + speed boost).
It wasn't like going from OG XBox in 2001 to Xbox 360 in 2005, which happened in the same space of time, 4 years.

XBox
-733 MHz Intel Pentium III / Celeron hybrid.
-Nvidia NV2A GPU with first gen shader model - 20 GFlops performance
-64 MB unified RAM.

Xbox 360
-3.2 GHz triple core IBM PowerPC / PPE CPU
-ATI GPU with unified shader model, 3rd gen+ shaders - 240 GFlops (12x the raw performance of Xbox GPU)
-512 MB unified RAM (8x more RAM than Xbox)
 

SpokkX

Member
If they delayed it a year and put a new CPU in there, yeah I would say they could have done that.

As it is, nah.

Yeah the (already bad on xbox one release) cpu is barely improved on xbox one x so:

No, it really is a gpu bump - no more
 

Betty

Banned
There are no more of the traditional 'generations' as far as Xbox is concerned.

Just like they said DRM was going to be implemented in Xbox One?

Just like Kinect has become an amazing, integral part of the Xbox One family it was designed to be?

Just like TV really did end up becoming as important to home consoles as Microsoft predicted?

Generations exist.

Xbox Two will play games the XOX can't and it'll get a beefier .5 update midway though the gen before the next gen comes out.
 

AmyS

Member
Just like they said DRM was going to be implemented in Xbox One?

Just like Kinect has become an amazing, integral part of the Xbox One family it was designed to be?

Just like TV really did end up becoming as important to home consoles as Microsoft predicted?

Generations exist.

Xbox Two will play games the XOX can't and it'll get a beefier .5 update midway though the gen before the next gen comes out.

This.

Thank you.
 

otakukidd

Member
I'm hopeful this is the case and indeed the future of Consoles. I wonder though... people always say that "BC doesn't matter", "everyone wants it, but no one uses it", etc., but is that still true now? If, let's say, MS comes out with X2, and it's BC with OG Xbox, 360, and X1, and Sony comes with a PS5 that just plays PS5 games, does that hurt PS5's sales in anyway? Does it impact their momentum? I think it does, but I'm interested if others think so too. I think the market has shifted in favor of BC Consoles and having game libraries carry forward across generations (even if it's seemingly not helping X1 much atm).

Also, to answer OP's question: LOL, no.
I think it totally matters for the first 2 years of the console. After that not really. For the first 2 years people want something to play on their new console, it won't even matter if it's a last gen game. I think that's why Xbox adding 360 bc didn't help move the needle. Cause it came after a time in which people had a lot of games to play on their new consoles. Now if Sony were to do no BC for the ps5 then they would be punished for it as much as Xbox was for all the shit they tried to do at the beginning of this gen. You can't get away with blocking used sells by yourself cause their oppenent will attack that every time , which is what Sony did. So if Xbox is doing it, there's no way they can afford to not do it. Also it gives PlayStation a BIG jumping off point to Xbox. Why would people stay if not for their old games. If there is no reason to keep people, it gives them an opportunity to jump to a different console like people did from Xbox to PlayStation this gen.
 
Just like PC, except not like PC at all

MS think future compatibility is important and im all for it. BC has been great and if this means the games i buy now will be playable on future consoles, then bring on the complications with absolute pleasure.
 

meerak

Member
I don't see at all how that would benefit them or developers.

Really feels to me they are making the best of the current situation.
 

SirNinja

Member
Generations are about more than horsepower. The X1X was made to play certain Xbox One games at an enhanced res/FPS, not any new ones - thus, same gen, despite the considerable gap in hardware.
 
Do you think Sony should have advertised the PS4 Pro as a new generation?


It's just a stronger version of what Sony did to the PS4.
 
Top Bottom