Maybe you should actually read the interview you referred to. He mentions the cost, flat-out.
-
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.
Xbox boss says hardware analysis between consoles is meaningless
- Thread starter Elginer
- Start date
"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it’s far more affordable than other hosting options – their goal here is to get more awesome games, not to nickel-and-dime developers. "
From this Thread: Respawn Entertainment gives more detail about the Cloud and Titanfall
bigdaddygamebot
Member
I've heard on a podcast or read on a message board at one point that Activision (maybe EA and Ubisoft as well) receive a part of XBL profits.
Not sure why.
Not sure how it breaks down.
Not sure if true.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I can't wait to hear Cerny respond to this.
Off-Kilter
Banned
Cannot be quoted enough.
LOL oh man.
In other words, claim that 360 is better than PS3 when specs are similar, and claim that comparisons don't matter when PS4 has a clear advantage.
That's fine, but let's not simply say the guy's right, because he's not. He's saying "meaningless", "doesn't matter", "a pointless argument" about hardware, not that games are simply more important than hardware. The latter is fine, the former is utter bollocks.
NoirVisage
Banned
I can't remember a time where power or graphics has helped MS.
The graphics in Halo are not the best when compared to the competition. Yet Halo has outsold most of the shooters released this gen.
The graphics in Minecraft are poor, yet it's sold 7m copies on the Xbox.
In short MS have the most success when they focus on gameplay, which is what this guy is on about.
The graphics in Halo are not the best when compared to the competition. Yet Halo has outsold most of the shooters released this gen.
The graphics in Minecraft are poor, yet it's sold 7m copies on the Xbox.
In short MS have the most success when they focus on gameplay, which is what this guy is on about.
BRocknRolla
Member
Exactly.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Well obviously he would downplay the specs if they were not in his favor.
You can be sure Microsoft would be using them as a bulletpoint if the opposite was true.
I don't know what I am reading anymore.
You can be sure Microsoft would be using them as a bulletpoint if the opposite was true.
I don't know what I am reading anymore.
krypt0nian
Banned
Fuck, this generation is excellent already! The sheer entertainment value Microsoft faux pas has given already is near cloud infinite.
BlastProcessing
Member
Xbox guy said:
shinobi said:
The idea that the people who handled the Xbox One announcement also said this is mind bottling.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Cerny is too classy to partake in this crap.
Not to defend Microsoft's ridiculous PR bullshit, but I wish people would at least quote them correctly on it.
40/10=4
If the Xbox One is 10 times more powerful than the 360 in raw processing power, and 40 times more powerful when making using of the cloud, then they are claiming that the Xbox One using the cloud is 4 times more powerful than without the cloud. So the performance increase from the cloud alone is supposedly a factor of 4, not 30 or 40.
It's still an absurd claim, not based on anything resembling reality though.
More affordable can be construed different ways; I thought it was free.
Nafai1123 said:
I didn't say Respawn said it; just didn't have enough information about Gaikai to form an opinion. I would appreciate your input though.
Garrett 2U
Member
I know it is fun to make fun of Xbox higher ups, but this interview was simply misunderstood or is being spun to fill an agenda.
He says comparing hardware is in some ways meaningless.
Which it is. I think we can all agree that the vast majority of consumers care about the software experiences.
His statements are actually reinforced by all the people pointing out Microsoft's emphasis on tech last gen.
Both the 360 and PS3 ended up selling about even worldwide because they both offered unique experiences, not because Microsoft through out a bunch of numbers in 2005.
Read the article for yourself, don't always trust one person's interpretation.
He says comparing hardware is in some ways meaningless.
Which it is. I think we can all agree that the vast majority of consumers care about the software experiences.
His statements are actually reinforced by all the people pointing out Microsoft's emphasis on tech last gen.
Both the 360 and PS3 ended up selling about even worldwide because they both offered unique experiences, not because Microsoft through out a bunch of numbers in 2005.
Read the article for yourself, don't always trust one person's interpretation.
Imagine if they had gone 8-bit. Lordy, they would have absolutely demolished the competition.
Yellowflashdude
Member
So going super saiyan is meaningless for ms?
Thanks; so it is affordable than other options. Is that true?
Gears of War?
Multiplat performance?
The original Halo was one of the most visually impressive games of the time.
The Minecraft phenomenon was in full swing before it was released on 360. Also, they didn't focus on anything....unless you count grabbing it as exclusive "focus."
Well, I guess I don't really need to answer this since everyone else kinda already did. But thanks for playing.
SolidSnakex
Member
That's probably going to change once gamescom arrives since MS backtracked on some of their policies that gave Sony an advantage. I'd expect Sony to roll out some of their higher end studio titles to prove the point.
I just re-read it; I was going off of memory...my bad.
Can Crusher
Banned
So...what?
How is it not a 30x multiplier over the original comparison AKA the Xbox 360? How the hell does 10 turn into 1, and 40 into 4?
Thier console will be able to play the big next gen 3rd party games, that's all that matters.
Monty Mole
Member
Specs are always discussed every generation.
If MS wants to show where Xbox One's tech has advantages over PS4, then they should talk about them, rather than just banging on about transistor counts and "The Cloud".
Xbox One is certainly a more customised hardware design than PS4 though, between the ESRAM, DMEs, SHAPE, etc. It's more engineered, I'll give him that. But none of that matters if PS4 ultimately delivers better performance.
EDIT: All that aside, nobody can argue against his point that the actual games are more important than the specs. It's the reason PS2 was so successful. But then this isn't like the PS2 era either, where there were literally hundreds of third party exclusives.
If MS wants to show where Xbox One's tech has advantages over PS4, then they should talk about them, rather than just banging on about transistor counts and "The Cloud".
Xbox One is certainly a more customised hardware design than PS4 though, between the ESRAM, DMEs, SHAPE, etc. It's more engineered, I'll give him that. But none of that matters if PS4 ultimately delivers better performance.
EDIT: All that aside, nobody can argue against his point that the actual games are more important than the specs. It's the reason PS2 was so successful. But then this isn't like the PS2 era either, where there were literally hundreds of third party exclusives.
flyingmonkeywhoa
Banned
Minecraft was already successful before it came to the Xbox, they just decided to moneyhat console exclusivity so they could reap some of that success. It worked.
Halo 4 looks better than a lot of FPSs on the market, but what does that have to do with selling inferior hardware that costs more than the competitor? They use the cloud computing line everytime people try to compare specs.
Pulling out a quote from 2005 is crazy. That was a long time ago. That's like pulling out a quote saying that Sony isn't charging for online from 2006. You want to run with something use the 5 billion transistor or 30 x 360 quotes, that shit JUST happened. They'll never point out direct spec numbers because they literally lose at everything. Except CPU I guess, since that's a wash. If the PS4 was weaker I don't think we'd be getting Mr. Cerny going into detail like he has lately. Or maybe we would just because that dude's really into his hardware.
The multiplats will be fine on the Xbox, and the console will still have great looking games.
He then follows up by saying, "Id rather not even have the conversation, because its not going to matter." and reiterates further that it's "a pointless argument". He's not leaving much room for interpretation by the time he's finished.
The saddest part is that their cloud BS seems to be working. I think they took a page out of Herman Cain's 2012 election book. Namely, you don't need to give any detailed information if you have a catchy phrase to toss around. For Cain it was "9/9/9", for Microsoft, it's "infinite power of the cloud."
Sony is doing all the technical talk, but if you look around the net, people are latching onto that cloud shit as though it means something.
painful fart
Member
Oh yeah, that secret jizz coming from the clouds.
Why not just release the figures and be done with it, if it is just meaningless anyway? MS are really looking like a bunch of defensive cowards when they keep going on like this.
Why not just release the figures and be done with it, if it is just meaningless anyway? MS are really looking like a bunch of defensive cowards when they keep going on like this.
I know that 7 good years of gaming may have enchanted some gamers out there, but in the end, we're talking about Microsoft. 4 out of 5 of their hardware products tend to flop. I hope they learned their lesson with what happened at E3 though. The Xbox 360's successes improved the industry as a whole through stiff competition which Sony sorely needed, since they were getting cocky too.
Well Gakai is a cloud platform. Currently it's planning to be used to stream full games to support backwards capability/instant game demos/etc, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily limited to only those functions. The fact is anyone, even you or me, can use Azure as a cloud platform. If developers were to go to Sony and say "hey, we really want to use this cloud platform for our game" it's not impossible for them to do it. Whether they would or not is unknown, but at this point the only difference I see in capability is the possible implementation of some functions directly in the Microsoft API that would assist with cloud development, and that's still something we know very little about.
I agree, but that's not what this thread is really about. It's about how horribly MS execs are communicating with their potential customer base. They claim Sony is blurring the message by delivering transparent, meaningful hardware specs. Meanwhile they've been talking in vague terms about the cloud and 5 billion transistor counts. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
Fruitster
Member
Sony seem confident in what they have with PS4. Confident people don't need to boast. Also some of Sony's top guys seem to have some class where as Microsoft's seem to completely lack it.
Night_Trekker
Member
Of course it's meaningless... now.
It was filled with meaning when the original Xbox was far and away the most powerful of the three companies consoles, though.
It was filled with meaning when the original Xbox was far and away the most powerful of the three companies consoles, though.
Enough with the cloud power multiplier discussion. You know it's BS, the console can all of a sudden be played offline, and they've YET to tell us one thing about what it does, because they haven't figured out how to get out of saying the cloud was just their term for DRM. The cloud is going to hold you game saves.
I found this from the respawn blog post; http://www.respawn.com/news/lets-talk-about-the-xbox-live-cloud/
What is he saying here?
What is he saying here?
NoirVisage
Banned
Let's do some math here.
Say Xbox 360 performance is A, Xbox One (raw) performance is B, and the performance enhancement added by the cloud is C
So B=10*A
and B*C=40*A
Substituting in the value for B: (10*A)*C=40*A
then C=(40*A)/(10*A)
Therefore C=4
And again, the cloud will never actually increase performance by a factor of 4, but that is what they are claiming.
Dead Prince
Banned
that p2p is shit.
The point is that everybody with better hardware would publish specs while everybody with inferior hardware wouldn't publish specs, but say something like "doesn't really matter, and look at this, we have cookies" instead.
It has always been that way. Sony would likely do the same as Microsoft if they had inferior specs, and Microsoft would brag about specs if there was anything to brag about. (Hell, they are already bragging with "fucking nothing").
dedicated servers > p2p (think host advantage for an example)
Night_Trekker
Member
Exactly.