I hope MS will just wait on a new next box(till 012 at elast) since the 360 was so rushed..... and hope to god there is no PS4 till 015 >>jamesworkshop said:
Microsoft: Xbox 360 Is The Console of The Long Future
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Are you retarded? Blu Ray is going to replace DVD, That's not a gimmick. And, no, There will be no FULL HD streaming. I'm guessing you have not looked at the numbers of people with high speed internet connections. There is nowhere NEAR enough to make streaming viable. Don't talk out your fanboy ass next time if you don't know what you're talking about.theApoc said:
The 360 has been the least reliable hardware of this console generation. Honestly, a hardware change can be greatly beneficial to them by shedding the whole red ring debacle.
That said, I can see many reasons why keeping the current hardware could be beneficial (e.g. if Natal falls flat, even more likely since no console extension in history has ever turned out well, they can still rely on games for the 360).
As a consumer, right now I'm not exactly looking forward to the next line of consoles. They're going to have to prove to me that it's going to be worth it, and while the technology of Natal is impressive, I have yet to see any content worth the upgrade.
That said, I can see many reasons why keeping the current hardware could be beneficial (e.g. if Natal falls flat, even more likely since no console extension in history has ever turned out well, they can still rely on games for the 360).
As a consumer, right now I'm not exactly looking forward to the next line of consoles. They're going to have to prove to me that it's going to be worth it, and while the technology of Natal is impressive, I have yet to see any content worth the upgrade.
All they have to do is make 10-20$ worth of changes to the heat sink to make it not fail under most circumstance...., they are cutting their losses and not changing it as much as possible.pneuma08 said:
I saw a lot of people calling BluRay out as a gimmick. I would like to point out that it is not a gimmick, and it may actually be something that MS will be forced to adapt to. Layered DVD can hold up to 8.5 GB (single sided, multilayer), while a BD can hold over 30GB on just one layer (and plans to hit 100GB multilayer in the next few years). This presents a massive limitation to developers, as Square Enix has already demonstrated. The MP3 replaced CDs so quickly because it takes a few minutes to download a 5~10 MB song (most of them aren't even that big). The current internet infrastructure is not efficient enough to provide you with convenient downloads of 20+ GB. It'll take you almost a week of non-stop downloading to get the 20~25GB game that is FF13. Not only will you be annoyed, but your ISPs will be bitching about it too.
I think MS's problem might be more about economics and sociology than electronic engineering. If Sony follows the trend they've set, then we can expect to see the PS4 sometime around 2012~2013. If MS doesn't put out a replacement for the X360 at around the same time, they're going to be late joining the "Next-Gen" crowd. It won't really matter if the X360 is still technically capable. By that time it will be stale. It will be old. It will be uncool. It will be what the losers who are too poor to afford the new toys play. The amount of hype surrounding the X360 by then would be equivalent to the amount of hype around the PS2 in 2008. The X360 will thrive as it already has, but it will not allow MS to maintain a stranglehold over Sony.
The worst part is that MS might be caught in a difficult position in 2014~2016 (depending on when the replacement for X360 comes along), one that's similar to what the PS3 encountered in 2006 but worse. They're going to be looking at an industry that has had 2~4 years of playing around with the PS4, without a player base for their new console, and having to break in with a brand new, high priced console against a Sony console that people are already familiar with and is most likely already at the "Sweet Spot" of $300 a pop. On top of all that, the PS4 would already have a few years of game releases under its belt, with the 3rd party developers already getting the hang of developing for it. What that means is that the new MS console would essentially have PS4 ports. Combined with a terrible first party lineup (aside from Project 343, Rare and Lionhead, they have basically no first party devs), MS will be in a difficult position in terms of gaming library. A large portion of the PS3's current success (perhaps even more so for the Wii) can be attributed to the massive first party support that the console has. As a company that's almost completely dependent upon third party support, can MS really afford to fall behind Sony in the next generation?
EDIT: Just in case someone wants to try to pull this one on me. No, neither Halo nor Gears of War are first party (Halo will be soon). Bungie is NOT a subsidiary of MS, and neither is Epic Games. The only big first party X360 games that I can recall are Halo Wars and Fable.
I think MS's problem might be more about economics and sociology than electronic engineering. If Sony follows the trend they've set, then we can expect to see the PS4 sometime around 2012~2013. If MS doesn't put out a replacement for the X360 at around the same time, they're going to be late joining the "Next-Gen" crowd. It won't really matter if the X360 is still technically capable. By that time it will be stale. It will be old. It will be uncool. It will be what the losers who are too poor to afford the new toys play. The amount of hype surrounding the X360 by then would be equivalent to the amount of hype around the PS2 in 2008. The X360 will thrive as it already has, but it will not allow MS to maintain a stranglehold over Sony.
The worst part is that MS might be caught in a difficult position in 2014~2016 (depending on when the replacement for X360 comes along), one that's similar to what the PS3 encountered in 2006 but worse. They're going to be looking at an industry that has had 2~4 years of playing around with the PS4, without a player base for their new console, and having to break in with a brand new, high priced console against a Sony console that people are already familiar with and is most likely already at the "Sweet Spot" of $300 a pop. On top of all that, the PS4 would already have a few years of game releases under its belt, with the 3rd party developers already getting the hang of developing for it. What that means is that the new MS console would essentially have PS4 ports. Combined with a terrible first party lineup (aside from Project 343, Rare and Lionhead, they have basically no first party devs), MS will be in a difficult position in terms of gaming library. A large portion of the PS3's current success (perhaps even more so for the Wii) can be attributed to the massive first party support that the console has. As a company that's almost completely dependent upon third party support, can MS really afford to fall behind Sony in the next generation?
EDIT: Just in case someone wants to try to pull this one on me. No, neither Halo nor Gears of War are first party (Halo will be soon). Bungie is NOT a subsidiary of MS, and neither is Epic Games. The only big first party X360 games that I can recall are Halo Wars and Fable.
I think if MS did a unit twice as powerful as the 360 at 400$ a pop and fully BWC with the 360(and the xbox via some money scheme) with blu ray and supports the 360 games fully on live for 5+ more years they will do well. As long as they can make their user base use the unit while they build up new titles on it its all win. The PS3 had alot of issues with this one of the reason I have put off getting one I have played it alot and the 360 and WII and all but none are really worth the money... >>Pingieking said:
Cool! Atleast it means I won't have to sink a huge amount of money again for awhile if what they say is true......
There's the key sentence. Can they get some momentum on the new console despite the fact that all it'll have will be Xbox+X360 games and (likely inferior) PS4 ports? Sony tried this in 2006~2007 and it almost killed the PS3. If MS does wait until 2015 then it's position may be much much worse than Sony's was in 2007, since the PS4 will likely have 3 year lead compared to the 1 year lead the X360 had over the PS3. I think that a fully backward compatible machine with almost no library of its own will have a difficult time surviving no matter which company it came from.ZippyDSMlee said:
Going against the industry trend in terms of not releasing consoles the same time as others is possible, but it's a very big gamble on the part of the companies. It means that the company basically has to go it alone for the first few years as it tries to get market shares and dev support from two very well entrenched opponents. I don't think MS is capable of doing this at this time because they don't have enough first party developers to give their console any kind of edge in the library.
One wildcard in all this is Natal. IF (a very big if) Natal is a smashing success comparable to the iPod or Wii, then MS can do whatever the hell it wants for the next two decades and no one will be able to challenge them.
All I can say is well done on being 100% predictable. You know who you are.
I don't care who started it all you fanboys are pathetic, just typical, an announcement from microsoft and every over zealous, slack jawed, incestuous retard starts waving their console banners.
Please sign off from the Escapist and cease playing video games as being associated with you in any way, shape or form makes me retch.
I don't care who started it all you fanboys are pathetic, just typical, an announcement from microsoft and every over zealous, slack jawed, incestuous retard starts waving their console banners.
Please sign off from the Escapist and cease playing video games as being associated with you in any way, shape or form makes me retch.
Well I think a next box can come on in 1-4 years from now all that will matter is that it can do what the PS3 can do with graphics(if they double the CPU/GPU/RAMM/FSB it will do it and more) and if it will support the wealth of people on the 360/live, I think the key is supporting the 360 flawlessly with that as the foundation(and better hardware for new gaming) everything else will fall into place and they will have their niche stabilized enough to keep on trucking another cycle.Pingieking said:
Well decade at least, if the natal is not still born lol
Owning a PS3, a XBOX360, a Wii and a high end pc (Phenom Deneb running at 3,4Ghz, 2x Saphire 1gb videocards xfired and 8 gb's of ram) I still favour my Xbox, it's dashbord is inviting, the constantly added and updated features of live are a treat and well worth the pay and the media center feature means I can access all the media my pc has stored without any interference.
I do believe it will be a long runner, most definitely and it won't be because of Natal, at least I sincerely doubt it, I think it's because of the lack of blu-ray. Yep, that's right. I think Microsoft is so self conscious about their HD-DVD epic fail that they are trying to over compensate by stuffing the live feature with everything but the kitchen sink without raising the price.
As for red rings, mine is the first core system with the 20 gb hdd, and I've finished every game that's even remotely worthwhile and released on it and it still works. Instead of having to purchase a new one because of the RROD I purchased an elite for my nephew who had a RROD and kept the hard drive for myself.
In sony's defense they aren't going to be replacing their black beaty with a new console anytime soon either. The ps3 has some things going for it, it's functional, reliable and the exclusives might not be worth it to me to make it my favourite console, but they justify the price tag.
Ratchet and Clank, Gran Turismo, Uncharted, Metal Gear, Little Big Planet and God Of War 3 (+ HD remake of 1 and 2) are all a must play for any game lover.
I do believe it will be a long runner, most definitely and it won't be because of Natal, at least I sincerely doubt it, I think it's because of the lack of blu-ray. Yep, that's right. I think Microsoft is so self conscious about their HD-DVD epic fail that they are trying to over compensate by stuffing the live feature with everything but the kitchen sink without raising the price.
As for red rings, mine is the first core system with the 20 gb hdd, and I've finished every game that's even remotely worthwhile and released on it and it still works. Instead of having to purchase a new one because of the RROD I purchased an elite for my nephew who had a RROD and kept the hard drive for myself.
In sony's defense they aren't going to be replacing their black beaty with a new console anytime soon either. The ps3 has some things going for it, it's functional, reliable and the exclusives might not be worth it to me to make it my favourite console, but they justify the price tag.
Ratchet and Clank, Gran Turismo, Uncharted, Metal Gear, Little Big Planet and God Of War 3 (+ HD remake of 1 and 2) are all a must play for any game lover.
I like "Smatal" a whole heck of a lot better than "Natal". Natal's just one freaky name IMO.sephiroth1991 said:
MS is financially hurting from the RRoD fiasco. Sony is still working to catch up from 3rd place and has long stated they have a 10yr plan for the PS3. Neither are in any hurry to make a new console, so it probably will be close to 10yrs before one of them decides to get the jump on the other.
Natal might become a huge hit with little kids, and Dads won't be worrying about a controller slipping out of their kids' hands & breaking the precious HDTV. With time & good marketing, I can see it giving the Wii a run for its money in the kid demographic. A 360 v2.o would probably go a long way in assuring the public they've fixed the RRoD issue too. Building in Natal would be a good excuse to redesign it to better deal with heat. I never liked the anorexic look of the 360 anyway.
Someone said to beware Sega and their dabbling with peripherals.
Hmm was the MD/genesis really a failure? Quite a few decent games came out for the Sega CD and 32x... where Sega failed was releasing peripherals when they should have been working on a whole new platform. Saturn was just... not quite as good as the Playstation and seriously stumbled in marketing.
Microsoft just has to realise that no matter how successful Natal is they shouldn't rest on their laurels. My suggestion would be to use Natal + 360 as a test platform to develop a much more rounded console that integrates motion sensing.
Though I have a sneaking suspicion that they will be selling Natal + Xbox Arcade bundles in direct competition with the Wii for that oh so lucrative casual market. They may even go as far as to not even bother bundling and xbox controller with it but just the Natal and maybe the DVD remote to navigate through the options. It would need a new interface and I think it would only work once their streaming media are both extensive and VERY user friendly to access.
I don't think Natal was made for the traditional Xbox core of Halo-fans but to tap into that new and much derided non-gaming demographic, soccer moms who. Also selling to parents who want their kids to be more active with the whole jumping around thing with mo-cap.
Natal seems to offer as much for hardcore gamers as Wii: potential that will likely go untapped.
For example it has emerged that Natal no longer has a built in processor, which will lower cost and increase it's appeal to casuals but with the multiple input processing offloaded to the 360's CPU this will cripple the performance of most games and force them to be much simpler... much more like the Wii titles. SO far all demonstrations of Natal have been running via a powerful PC to process the data and send it to the 360 to then render the game.
Hmm was the MD/genesis really a failure? Quite a few decent games came out for the Sega CD and 32x... where Sega failed was releasing peripherals when they should have been working on a whole new platform. Saturn was just... not quite as good as the Playstation and seriously stumbled in marketing.
Microsoft just has to realise that no matter how successful Natal is they shouldn't rest on their laurels. My suggestion would be to use Natal + 360 as a test platform to develop a much more rounded console that integrates motion sensing.
Though I have a sneaking suspicion that they will be selling Natal + Xbox Arcade bundles in direct competition with the Wii for that oh so lucrative casual market. They may even go as far as to not even bother bundling and xbox controller with it but just the Natal and maybe the DVD remote to navigate through the options. It would need a new interface and I think it would only work once their streaming media are both extensive and VERY user friendly to access.
I don't think Natal was made for the traditional Xbox core of Halo-fans but to tap into that new and much derided non-gaming demographic, soccer moms who. Also selling to parents who want their kids to be more active with the whole jumping around thing with mo-cap.
Natal seems to offer as much for hardcore gamers as Wii: potential that will likely go untapped.
For example it has emerged that Natal no longer has a built in processor, which will lower cost and increase it's appeal to casuals but with the multiple input processing offloaded to the 360's CPU this will cripple the performance of most games and force them to be much simpler... much more like the Wii titles. SO far all demonstrations of Natal have been running via a powerful PC to process the data and send it to the 360 to then render the game.
It was not the peripherals that hurt sega it was the rush to get a good trend starter out.Treblaine said:
The Saturn was like the Xbox and was mostly a loss that they could not over come even with doing so well with the DC. Sega put to much time and effort into to many eggs and didnt really have the ability to pay for it all MS dose but it comes down to making their core product lasting as long as they can.
I own a 360. I've had the RROD twice. Was I pissed off? absolutely! (the first RROD came on Halo 3's release date) but the anger and rage has since faded. I think that the 360 has plenty of juice left in it. Personally I think its due to MS' strategy of software based products. You keep the same physical machine that keeps getting better software during its lifespan. Microsoft saw just how much potential Xbox Live had when they saw how popular it became. I don't own a PS3 and I know little about its online service other than its free. I don't know how it works or what the quality of the service is like, but i do know that despite you not having to cough up the money to use it, your paying for it in other ways. XBL is getting everything including the kitchen sink because MS is taking your subscription fees and sinking it back into improving XBL and therefore gaining more subscriptions and therefore getting more money. TO MY KNOWLEDGE (and I could be VERY MUCH WRONG) the PS3's online service is not nearly as versitle as XBL because the upgrades and content additions would probably have to come directly out of Sony's pocket. Common sense says that Sony would be less inclined to sink more money into improving their online service because that means its less money towards the bottom line and they can't recoup the expenses through more people signing up and paying a fee like Microsoft can.
As for Natal, I can't really form an opinion on it yet as all any of us have seen was that Milo tech demo, which for all we know was completely scripted. But should it take off, holy shit Microsoft will make Sony and Nintendo go the way of Sega in console making. If it fails, oh well yeah Microsoft will lose a lot of money, but so what? They have an ungodly grasp on the PC market that reaps in billions every year. Natal's potential failure will hurt, but it won't be the end of the world for Microsoft as some people are implying.
I think MS business wide strategy of releasing new software more often than hardware is a very smart one because I think that's the way technology is going. I would like to think that operating costs of server maintanence and development over 5-10 years are far less than the production costs of manufacturing millions of pieces of hardware. Also if software breaks down, you can release a repair patch online at virtually no cost to you or the consumer, while hardware failure on the other hand, is far more time consuming and costly (for any of us that have experienced the RROD) The real question is, will it hold up to Sony trying to release new and better looking hardware X amount of years from now.
As for Natal, I can't really form an opinion on it yet as all any of us have seen was that Milo tech demo, which for all we know was completely scripted. But should it take off, holy shit Microsoft will make Sony and Nintendo go the way of Sega in console making. If it fails, oh well yeah Microsoft will lose a lot of money, but so what? They have an ungodly grasp on the PC market that reaps in billions every year. Natal's potential failure will hurt, but it won't be the end of the world for Microsoft as some people are implying.
I think MS business wide strategy of releasing new software more often than hardware is a very smart one because I think that's the way technology is going. I would like to think that operating costs of server maintanence and development over 5-10 years are far less than the production costs of manufacturing millions of pieces of hardware. Also if software breaks down, you can release a repair patch online at virtually no cost to you or the consumer, while hardware failure on the other hand, is far more time consuming and costly (for any of us that have experienced the RROD) The real question is, will it hold up to Sony trying to release new and better looking hardware X amount of years from now.
Well Live dose have a 5ish year head start on live not only infrastructure wise but general advancements in what it is and what it dose.FoAmY99 said:
PSN started off as a media+gameing platform so it has more bugs to deal with but it is shaping up nicely. The trouble is MS up to are they prepping a system to launch in 2-3 years or are they going to wait 5+ years. I have to admit they are going to have to do one in under 4 years any longer and they may not be able to use their brand power.
No I didn't.thebobmaster said:
From what I have read it is not that simple. Xbox 360 doesn't get significantly hotter than any other console, the problem seems to be many many little problems mostly down to the type and method of solder that is very sensitive to use, especially long extended sessions.ZippyDSMlee said:
The details of how xbox 360s are manufactured are of course trade secrets but it just seems that the design is not well enough refined and the manufacturing method is not up to standard which could be down to how little experience Microsoft has in actually making hardware. Remember they made their billions in software, they didn't even make the Xbox original them-self but was practically a third party project left to Nvidia... only that turned out very badly for Microsoft in terms of controlling their product.
It seems it would take a lot of time and money to REALLY improve the 360's reliability to on par with PS3.