A hardware refresh will get people excited. More so then just a slim model.
-
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.
Microsoft unifying PC/XB1 platforms, Phil implies Xbox moving to incremental upgrades
- Thread starter dancrane212
- Start date
A hardware refresh will get people excited. More so then just a slim model.
That's actually a solid point.
Because implementing it is trivial compared to prior generations. Hardware and software designs will be relatively consistent going forward. That is, PC-based.
AncientDiety
Banned
I have my moments lol.
I had honestly forgot about HD. It blew me away when I played Geometry Wars last generation. LOL!
AncientDiety
Banned
One of the reasons last gen started off slow was back then was people were just starting to migrate to HDTV's, amazing how fast time flies.
Yep! I totally remember that now. Fuck was that gen long!
AncientDiety
Banned
I remember arguments on forums people would try to say HDTV was a gimmick and you could not see much if any difference haha.
Night Angel
Member
I'm still wondering who the Xbox 1.X is for.
Whatever they release will have the same games as the PS4, and will probably only run them marginally better (assuming a reasonable sub-$450 price point). It will lack exclusives and it will cost significantly more than the PS4 at that time. It will be fighting against a console with an enormous userbase, mindshare, and great word of mouth.
Who, aside from current XB1 owners, is going to buy this thing?
Power has never been the main reason people choose one console over another. If you had to pick one factor, it would be price. I can't see this increasing the XB1s market share, it seems more like an attempt to extract more money from their existing users.
Whatever they release will have the same games as the PS4, and will probably only run them marginally better (assuming a reasonable sub-$450 price point). It will lack exclusives and it will cost significantly more than the PS4 at that time. It will be fighting against a console with an enormous userbase, mindshare, and great word of mouth.
Who, aside from current XB1 owners, is going to buy this thing?
Power has never been the main reason people choose one console over another. If you had to pick one factor, it would be price. I can't see this increasing the XB1s market share, it seems more like an attempt to extract more money from their existing users.
I wasn't around for GAF then, but I remember people saying that.
I also remember when I first bought a PS3 I was freaking blown away by it because it had HDMI and a Blu Ray player!
Now I can't remember the last time I used physical media to watch a movie.
Or remember when people said there's no difference between 720 and 1080. Blu ray Vs. HD-DVD.
Man, it's crazy how fast technology moves these days....
Dee Dah Dave
Member
I ask for clarification and you link me one of your own posts? That's not quite what I was looking for.
I mean you could be right, eventually. But there's certainly no evidence of it right now. In fact just the opposite, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist after all.
A unifying of services across several hardware platforms != exit strategy confirmed!
Developers had to wrap their noggins around multi-core processing as well. IIRC, it wasn't very well fleshed out at that point time.
People like new and shiny toys. Come on there's always a market for new and more powerful toys. ALWAYS!
AncientDiety
Banned
Good point, like gamz said last gen was so damn long. Definitely be OK with shorter cycles.
Exactly. You'll see more games that are more like a service with BC with newer hardware not worrying about that. I can say that right now that I don't want another Killer Instinct, i'd rather them just keep building on this same version. If I got a new XBO, I'd want to continue to play that same game and have them continue to update it because that's the game that I like. If my Xbox vNext had some features that it could take advantage of (4k or something), I hope that it could...but it would be on the developer to choose when to take advantage of that feature. They aren't beholden to make that transition right away. It's really no different than phones today that when a new feature for iOS comes out, it's not necessarily true that all the apps are updated to work with that new feature (if at all). It would depend on the userbase of that app and whatever feedback/metrics the developer chooses to make that decision to support it. No reason why consoles can't act the same way. That way the software features is only on the developer to support. Think about it, MS wouldn't need a mandate to say "hey your game needs to be 4k" like they did with 720p...it would just be in the best interest of the developer to do so, otherwise people aren't going to play your game. To me, it puts more onus on the developer to support stuff than the hardware/platform holder.
Yeah it took a long as time for them to really dig into the PS3. The last couple of years is when it really starting to shine.
Yes, this. Pretty much that's where we are going with Windows 10, OSX, Office 365, etc...Just more updates on a base system.
I mean the last thing I want to do is in 2-3 years is boot up my new console and the store is empty and my digital games aren't there anymore.
If MS can pull this off I honestly think it'll be a wastershed moment for consoles. I really, really do.
That's not going to happen with either Playstation or Xbox. Both next-gen platforms will use the same OS, network infrastructure and architecture as they're using currently, the next box will simply be a more powerful version of what they sell now.
And that approach lets developers choose when they want to support the newer features. If we wait 3 years...people are going to expect developers to take advantage of those new features to the fullest...and it would basically be the same stuff that we're in now (aka short generations). No one would want the old stuff and everyone would get the new stuff and that group of people. If it happened every year...there's no way to expect every developer to support the new stuff (and I mean this for all of the systems, not just MS). Game developers should just make games from a base that they choose and have features that they want to support to give the experience that they feel is right for a user. It's literally no different than supporting Kinect than not supporting Kinect.
Yes, this. MS will of course support with their games to the utmost and if it's easy for devs to support it they will. Nothing is easier to market then shit thats new and looks great.
Those have bought neither yet? Why do people always assume that every gamer has already bought a new gen console?
It won't be 'marginally' more powerful, I'm pretty sure of that, after all that would be the selling point of the console. Power has been the biggest issue this gen so far ie resolution gate.
What I can't wrap my head around is how they will define where their 'generation' ends, or do Devs simply pick their own minimum spec and develop from there? It's an interesting idea.
What if it never does? I love that idea. I mean how long has PC's been doing it.
It's for the people that they was trying to sell Xbox One to when they 1st revealed it the Xbox name just caused a uproar because Gamers was used to build the Xbox name & now the gamers are the 2nd class citizens on a STB that has the Xbox name on it.
Xbox One was suppose to be the iPad of the living room & Kinect was going to be an important part of that but because the Xbox name is attached to it the gamers shot MS vision down.
Exit strategy of the Console model.
There'd likely no longer be the concept of a generation. Software feature sets have already been more or less standardized--why recreate the whole enchilada from scratch when you can upgrade the base hardware and keep your feature set intact?
Pjsprojects
Member
After reading the last three pages trying to catch up,can someone tell me if anything is confirmed?
Have Microsoft confirmed a sort of X1+ in any way or are we still guessing?
Have Microsoft confirmed a sort of X1+ in any way or are we still guessing?
What is the console model?
We're debating the viability of iterative console hardware and backwards-forwards compatibility.
Pjsprojects
Member
Thanks.
Fredrik
Member
Seeing the same console winning every DF Face Off and hearing the talk about having the best versions of all the popular AAA multiplats will sell consoles for sure. This is basically PS4 up to this point, sure future exclusives matters too but generally speaking I think people focus way too much on the exclusives in sales, I honestly don't think they matter all that much anymore, when the first wave of exclusives are out it'll take too long for the second wave to arrive but having better performance on everything will always be a plus.
There are so few exclusives nowadays , the chance they are actually the type of game you enjoy is slim.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
But Phil has 'announced' they will be making new console hardware just the other day.
Now that console might not be quite the same as it is today, but I'm pretty sure it will still be a console. i.e plug n play hardware.
The fine details might change, but that has already happened anyway. We've gone from a 'true' console which exclusively plays games, to full on multi media devices hooked up to the internet.
It makes sense that things will change even further, because technologies change as time advances. New concepts are born. It may look and work different, but it's still a part of the same family tree.
AncientDiety
Banned
Really not that simple, never hurt ps2, even ps3 ww with all going against it sold faster then 360.
barneystuta83
Member
Phil was on the Major Nelson Radio podcast. You can listen here: http://majornelson.com/podcast/mnr-564-phil-spencer-spring-games-and-more/
This came up and Phil elaborated a bit more on what he meant.
I'm summary he said:
- not talking about incremental hardware upgrades to a console. he said something like 'we won't be selling a tool kit/screw driver with every console'
- would love to bring hardware improvements quicker to market when the market is ready, instead of having to wait until the' next generation'
- more about philosophy of other digital media. You buy a book, mp3, or movie... You can watch it on multiple devices, even when you upgrade
- wants the Xbox to be' forwards compatible'
- also talked a bit about PC and Console how they are different markets with different audiences and there is a place for both
- not making an Xbox into an 'upgradeable PC' nor are they trying to make every PC a console like experience
The cynics will say that this is an official MS podcast, so the questions and answers were likely rehearsed.
But, I can see what MS are trying to do with their longer term strategy. It makes complete sense.
Taking your digital games with you from generation to generation would be great. And the vision is not emulation, games will just work.
Apple can do it. Android can do it. Windows PC can do it.
Can a console? If they can pull it off, I think it will be great for gamers.
This came up and Phil elaborated a bit more on what he meant.
I'm summary he said:
- not talking about incremental hardware upgrades to a console. he said something like 'we won't be selling a tool kit/screw driver with every console'
- would love to bring hardware improvements quicker to market when the market is ready, instead of having to wait until the' next generation'
- more about philosophy of other digital media. You buy a book, mp3, or movie... You can watch it on multiple devices, even when you upgrade
- wants the Xbox to be' forwards compatible'
- also talked a bit about PC and Console how they are different markets with different audiences and there is a place for both
- not making an Xbox into an 'upgradeable PC' nor are they trying to make every PC a console like experience
The cynics will say that this is an official MS podcast, so the questions and answers were likely rehearsed.
But, I can see what MS are trying to do with their longer term strategy. It makes complete sense.
Taking your digital games with you from generation to generation would be great. And the vision is not emulation, games will just work.
Apple can do it. Android can do it. Windows PC can do it.
Can a console? If they can pull it off, I think it will be great for gamers.
JetForceGemini
Banned
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIL0xEjEUi0&feature=youtu.be
Just me giving a few thoughts to how Microsoft is bringing xbox games to pc and where they're going wrong..
Constructive criticism is very much welcomed .. Especially if you think I suck, atleast tell me why you think so lol
Just me giving a few thoughts to how Microsoft is bringing xbox games to pc and where they're going wrong..
Constructive criticism is very much welcomed .. Especially if you think I suck, atleast tell me why you think so lol
...Scatter...
Banned
Me. It's for me. I'd buy one every 3 years. Essentially they would sell me 2 consoles in 6 years vs. one. And I would buy more games because I'd be excited about 1080 60. Like The Division right now. I want it, but played the beta and the frame rate underwhelmed me. Kept wishing it was better because the game seems legit.
People who want the newest thing.
People who don't have a next-gen device. (meaning they don't have a PS4/WiiU)
People who want an Xbox and don't have one. (meaning they have a PS4/WiiU)
People who want another Xbox device for their home.
Nothing's confirmed. Phil just said long term he would like for hardware advancements to reach the console space quicker.
With everything Microsoft has been saying ever since it went the consumer electronics route around the time of Windows 8, I'm starting to notice it keeps dancing around the existence of HTPCs.
Whenever Microsoft talks about PC, it's always in terms of the desktop experience and what kinds of games are good for that versus what kinds of games are good for Xbox, as if they should remain separate in some ways. Meanwhile everyone else has established that you can play console-like games on PC the same way you'd play them on a console, partly due to Xinput even! Valve is going all the way with the "10-foot experience," and arguably even Windows 8 and 10 make more sense in a living room environment than a desk environment. It's like Microsoft is afraid the living room gaming PC makes the Xbox redundant.
I get that, but Microsoft needs to realize a couple things: Firstly, Xbox hardware revenue has never really been that big a deal in the grand picture of the company's business. It's kind of already being forced to realize this since it's no longer counting hardware sales but "Xbox Live engagement" or something. Maybe the fear is of fewer people paying for Live? Spencer talking like he is suggests Microsoft is starting to care less about hardware sales and more about software sales on Microsoft's platforms. Secondly, Microsoft needs to realize putting the exclusives on PC along with Xbox isn't going to tank Xbox sales, at least I don't think it will. The number of people who would drop Xbox in favor of a Windows version of Halo isn't significant from a sales standpoint in my opinion. I think it would be worth the number of customers gained who would buy Halo on Windows, but won't buy an Xbox just for Halo.
In my mind, Xbox in the future can stick around as a cheap, easy, closed HTPC option. I guess that would make it Microsoft's Alienware Alpha but locked to Windows Store software?
Whenever Microsoft talks about PC, it's always in terms of the desktop experience and what kinds of games are good for that versus what kinds of games are good for Xbox, as if they should remain separate in some ways. Meanwhile everyone else has established that you can play console-like games on PC the same way you'd play them on a console, partly due to Xinput even! Valve is going all the way with the "10-foot experience," and arguably even Windows 8 and 10 make more sense in a living room environment than a desk environment. It's like Microsoft is afraid the living room gaming PC makes the Xbox redundant.
I get that, but Microsoft needs to realize a couple things: Firstly, Xbox hardware revenue has never really been that big a deal in the grand picture of the company's business. It's kind of already being forced to realize this since it's no longer counting hardware sales but "Xbox Live engagement" or something. Maybe the fear is of fewer people paying for Live? Spencer talking like he is suggests Microsoft is starting to care less about hardware sales and more about software sales on Microsoft's platforms. Secondly, Microsoft needs to realize putting the exclusives on PC along with Xbox isn't going to tank Xbox sales, at least I don't think it will. The number of people who would drop Xbox in favor of a Windows version of Halo isn't significant from a sales standpoint in my opinion. I think it would be worth the number of customers gained who would buy Halo on Windows, but won't buy an Xbox just for Halo.
In my mind, Xbox in the future can stick around as a cheap, easy, closed HTPC option. I guess that would make it Microsoft's Alienware Alpha but locked to Windows Store software?
Final Verdict
Member
I think that would be good IF they could pull it off with no impact on development effort on the developer's part to make their game compatible with all the different SKUs.
Down side is that it would seriously limit their capability to code down to the metal effectively, and could drive overall prices up for MS as they would have to manufacture multiple SKUs.
Down side is that it would seriously limit their capability to code down to the metal effectively, and could drive overall prices up for MS as they would have to manufacture multiple SKUs.
The model where they release a closed box & make games for it until they release their next closed box & start making games for that closed box.
They are moving away from that.
They will release new hardware but it's not a new console as we know them today it will be Multimedia computer systems /STBs with games as part of the ecosystem.
It's basically a closed Windows 10 computer in a STB made for your TV.
Since I'm already going crazy with speculation, i'll pick it up a notch, "Fuck it, we'll do it live". They can have the affordable version of Xbox but then the enthusiast one.
Xbox One Pro.
- Newly designed Xbox One (akin to Surface Pro)
- Elite Xbox One Controller
- Two GPUs and new processor
- $1000
OS stuff is exactly the same as XBO. There's no reason not to have a more enthusiastic device and a more cheap version. Obviously that would go in the prices of $1k, so it's not like it's going to be a mass market huge success, but they could keep the supply low. They already do it with the Elite controller (most people don't buy a $150 controller) but if you can make something nice and it's not cheap...people will pay for it.
Night Angel
Member
To clarify: what will make a consumer choose an XB1.X instead of a PS4, PC, or XB1?
I thought I was clear that power has proven in past generations to be much less of a factor than price. The people who haven't yet decided on a next gen console will still, based on past results, go with the cheaper option.
I just don't see this as an attractive offer for bringing in a larger audience.
As for my claim that the power increase would be marginal: I can't see a whole lot of improvement at a $400 price point that will make an enormous difference in performance over what we're already getting from the current gen consoles.
Literally any reason. The answer to this question is inherently subjective--I can pick a PS4 instead of an XB1.X because the fans provide excellent cover for my brother's shitty metal. I can pick an XB1.X instead of a PC because the system doubles as a decent cooktop after long game sessions. It can get even sillier if you want.
I could say that continuation of your library would be a decent reason. I could say that playing all your games with improved performance over the base model is a decent reason. Any number of things. But the argument would continue to go in circles, regardless what I or anyone says.
"I just don't see" isn't a good form of argument. You can see anything you do or do not want to see. That's fine. But it's a terrible thing to argue against, because all that does is run directly into stubbornness and unwillingness to see a point.
Night Angel
Member
Oh ffs by "a consumer" I don't mean ONE consumer, I mean consumers at large.
I presented my case on why I don't think this strategy will succeed. "I don't think" wasn't the meat of my post, even if it was all you chose to read. This strategy flies in the face of what has been successful in the past in the console industry, and I have yet to see anyone post something resembling a good reason why this will be different.
Give me some evidence why I should ignore historical trends and see why a large portion of consumers outside of MS's existing base would want to do this in the console space.
I presented my case on why I don't think this strategy will succeed. "I don't think" wasn't the meat of my post, even if it was all you chose to read. This strategy flies in the face of what has been successful in the past in the console industry, and I have yet to see anyone post something resembling a good reason why this will be different.
Give me some evidence why I should ignore historical trends and see why a large portion of consumers outside of MS's existing base would want to do this in the console space.
Incremental upgrades seem to be the trend going forward, not just for MS, but Nintendo's NX likely will be too going by things Iwata has said. PS4 or 5 might even adopt this as well. Developers are feeling like there's too much risk these days with next generation consoles and have been making a lot of cross-gen titles. Konami even outlined that in one of their business slides that resetting the userbase to 0 every gen is killing companies and pushing companies to mobile and other forms of revenue.
Fredrik
Member
Not that simple either.
PS2 was the sequel to Playstation which was super popular, it was destined to sell a lot, the hype before the launch was also all about how powerful it was, that it was better to wait for PS2 than buy a DC. PS2 had a crazy amount of first and third party exclusives too which was very important back then.
Xbox got surprisingly popular considering that it came later, launched at an expensive price point and was a completely new box on the market. Xbox is actually a good example that power matters, without the power it would've sold even worse considering it brought very few other new things to the table.
I also think 360 became popular for the performance reason since every dev seemed to struggle with the PS3 ports and everything was better on 360. Online gaming was a huge part of it too of course.
This gen it's an even field when it comes to functionalities and exclusives aren't as important, so far I think it's all about PS4 simply because there are few reasons to buy a multiplat for XB1 when the PS4 versions are always best.
But what happens if there is a more powerful box out there later on? Or even two boxes if NX is powerful too. Will you still keep buying PS4 versions of multiplats?
Similar threads
- Locked