ShinyCharizard said:
I think alot of people are forgetting here that a lot of devs can't afford to developing games at the graphical level of the current generation of consoles, let alone the next.
There are a few things you're not realising here:
1. RAM and CPU have little to do with graphics. That is what the GPU is for.
More RAM means you can have larger levels, with more in them. Instead of a 200*200m box with 400 objects [Including all characters, buildings, grass, plants, items - everything], you can have a 600*600m area with 1600 objects. Obviously made up numbers, but you get the point.
A better CPU means you can have better AI running, and more things happening at the same time. Rather than fighting 2-3 enemies who only use basic attack patterns, you can fight 15-30 using advanced attack patterns, whilst also calculating real time damage to the environment and hundreds or thousands of status effects. Again, made up numbers, but you get the point.
2. A lot of the cost for graphics on current gen hardware comes from optimization to make them capable of running on current gen hardware. Graphics in general aren't that expensive. Rendering them in real time [Or with ultra-high detail i.e: the movie 'Avatar'] on hardware that is at least a decade old is where the cost comes in. Do it with a more powerful system, and you can rely on that system's power to an extent to simply brute force its way through the rendering, rather than needing you to hold its hand to make sure it doesn't drop below 30FPS too often.
OT:
Wow, if this is true Microsoft really isn't going the power route this generation. Sadly no info on the graphics card, but I'd be surprised if its better than a GTX 420 TBH.
Also love how there's no clock speed for the CPUs. 4 cores 16 threads is all well and good, but if you're running it at 1.4Ghz, you're even further behind than I'd thought.
If they release this for $200-$300 it might be worth its price. Much more and you're really starting to push it. Old hardware, with a locked down OS, limited game selection and non-modularity among other things really don't deserve a lot of money to be thrown at them, especially when the reliability of said system is mostly in the hands of MS, and not the user.