The Xbox 720

[Continuity]

I'm therefore always happy to read interviews where developers are quoted as saying they haven't reached the limits of what the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 can do. I'm only just beginning to see how consoles are falling behind in the hardware department,

Well... as a PC gamer I have been seeing the limitations of the consoles for a few years now.. I've been seeing those limitations bleeding into the PC game market. Graphically consoles are keeping up, OK this is mostly due the the fact that multi-platform games are developed pretty much for the weakest platform and so pretty much look the same on each...

but within that you have to realise the a game on the xbox is hyper optimised and they have spent massive resources doing that and have had to make massive design compromises to ensure that the graphics are viable... and on the other hand the PC is only using a tiny fraction of its potential, if even half of the effort in optimisation went into the PC version of games then we would be seeing double or triple the graphical fidelity that we are currently being served up.

New consoles please, now.

As for modular consoles? that seems to miss the point to me, and anyway, the xbox360 has lasted how long with fixed hardware?... so long as they aim high enough spec wise for the new xbox there is no reason it shouldn't last just as long or longer. Besides, whats the difference between buying a new graphics card for your xbox and just buying the next xbox if you see what I mean... so long as you keep them backwards compatible then you could just keep on releasing a new xbox every 3 years if you really feel that upgrades are that important.

 

[ranger19]

No thanks. As tempting as a console-based simplicity with pc-like upgrading might sound, Steam is good enough at that on PC. Leave my consoles be.

I think it would work, but only if the upgrades happened within a period of 5 years at least, no less.

I think that is a good generation period, considering how this generation is just a little past that. Also considering that I've only had my 360 for a little over two years(got the Wii first and then got my Elite about three years later because all my friends had one), and I've had some very good times with it, so much so it has felt like I've had the thing longer. I like the length of his generation so far, because of how long it has been is the reason I have been able to afford to experience two of this generations consoles, instead of one console like all the other generations I've lived during.

But I agree that it would be a bad idea to have an upgrade cycle like PCs do, it just isn't economical.

I know back when I tried to keep up with PC gaming, I was having to upgrade my PC at the most every two years, usually in less time. It was around about the time of this generation that I gave up on trying keep up with the PC upgrades.

I still find it crazy what relatively low priced PCs can't play. Christmas 2009, my dad got me a new PC(meaning latest tech of that PC year), just the PC and keyboard, no monitor, for 400 dollars. It can barely play high graphic games from 2006, heck the thing can barely play WoW. The same year, 2009, I previously around May, I bought my 360 Elite, for 435 dollars. My bundle came with one controller, a headset, Fable 2 and Halo 3, and three months of Xbox live. The thing has worked ever since and has played every game I bough for it. That is what makes consoles so convenient.

Since gaming is a major part of PCs, that each new PC model each year, the lowest base price model, should at least play PC games made in that year and ones that came before. It's rather dumb to have to pay at least twice the price of a console to get a PC that can play games at at least a console level. Yes I know it can be done cheaper if one takes the time to go on a scavenger hunt to find each random part to construct the PC, but a person should have to go to all that trouble to get a cheap gaming PC. Normal people just don't have the time to do such things.

I would say the only way upgradeable consoles would work, is that at the least every five years, all the console gamers have to do is pay at the most 150 dollars for a new upgrade.

I look at the Kinect as a kind of upgrade. That console upgrading should be handled.

First I just want to say - when I saw you had quoted an admittedly potentially inflammatory part of my post, I was worried that I had accidentally started a flame war. So thank you for responding in a well thought out way.

On to the response. I see what you're saying, and I suppose I can concede that if done properly, an upgradable console could circumvent a lot of my potential issues: if instead of getting a Kinect, we had gotten a new graphics card this gen or something, and it was priced properly, it might work. Microsoft would be tempted, of course, to overcharge, or have more frequent upgrades than that.

But let's say they don't, and instead of Kinect, we had gotten a new GPU or whatnot. Here's the problem: devs will always want to appear to the largest userbase. Part of the reason we haven't seen more Kinect games is that a dev knows there are millions of 360 owners without Kinect. A dev considering making a Kinect game knows he's instantly going to alienate the millions of non-Kinect owners.

Sure, the article adresses the idea of making different "graphics settings" but it points out that then the game isn't getting the personal polish/human touch. And this assumes devs will want to spend the money on using the higher graphics. I could imagine many games adding a Kinect-like gimmick (e.g. Mass Effect 3 voice commands) to pander to that audience, but I just don't see it being taken advantage of well enough.

So, to sum up: I could see it working in theory, but practically speaking I can't see it working out.

 

[ElPatron]

supersnip
Taken and not searching.

I get it, you're PC and hipster.

>I disagree with someone's views
>let's call him hipster/hater/fanboy/compare him to hitler

It's the basic modus operandi around here.

Aren't hipsters all about simplicity, Apple products and so on? If I am a hipster, does that make PC gaming easier?

Wait, I can't be a hipster because computer gaming is usually cheaper than consoles, and you know hipsters always pay for the expensive stuff.

Can I call you a hipster too? Because you like consoles?

Let's just end this non-sense, I have nothing against your choice, but calling every PC gamer a masochist bigot is crossing the line.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

So Xbox
Xbox 360 (Paradox enough)
And now 720? Who the hell is the "Creative mind" behind that.

360 + 360 = 720

Yes, I realise that, but look at the name.
It's bad enough they assimulated a box with a circle, but now they want a box and 2 circles?

 

[Hirolsx]

See what is they just do away with all moving parts? That would free up space in the box for better gear right?

 

[Zom-B]

Seems silly to make "upgradeable" consoles. Isn't that what PCs already are? The strength of game consoles is their stability and uniformity. Knowing that a game will play the same system to system. Know that, aside from connection speed, everyone will have the same online experience.

It seems counterproductive to make one thing like the other when you've already got the other, know what I mean? Microsoft doesn't really need to merge their gaming consoles and their PC products. They've already got both, with well established, overlapping demographics. Put more PC into the Xbox and you risk losing a lot of your less tech savvy, your casual gamers, your older gamers, the young children.

While the idea of an upgradeable console is appealing, ultimately it's probably not only redundant, but would be more of a hassle, more expensive and less effective than your average gaming rig. Seems like a bad idea.

For all I care, MS can go ahead and do that because I personally wouldn't buy an Xbox360, 720 or otherwise. I'll be happy to eventually get the next Sony console as long as it takes what the PS3 does and simply improves it. That's enough to make me happy; better graphics, better processors, better media integration, etc.

 

[ArchAngelKira]

Remember how much the ps3 was when it launched? I'd think 700-1000$. Also not alot of people would go that long mike for a system without a strong launch title,or rather wait for one. Another thing I love the 360 everything works smoothly nothings been hacked, (didn't lose credit card information). The achievement system is fun,I love my gamertag and I wouldn't think of abandoning all that for a newer system. Unless if they take all of that with them to the 720 and we get a bonuses from it. Being that that price is a big issue for me I'd like to hope that you could trade in a 360 and upgrade to a 720 to reduce the cost (and maybe get a fun little avatar award for it maybe a shirt that said 360/720) all and all we don't need a new console yet. Were not exactly bored with the 360 and it's functions. Funny isn't it Sony and nintendo had there issues but Microsoft had 2 consoles and no problems they had a fun "round" trip (hehehe) and still make smart decisions to this day such as, no Microsoft handheld device, and not being hacked. LONG LIVE XBOX!

 

[Smokescreen]

supersnip
Taken and not searching.

I get it, you're PC and hipster.

>I disagree with someone's views
>let's call him hipster/hater/fanboy/compare him to hitler

Where did I do this? I did not call you a hater/fanboy/hiter: I did call you a hipster, and by this I mean:

You seem to promote an eliteist mentality and don't have a sense of humor.

It's the basic modus operandi around here.

If you say so: I don't have that experience. If you do, maybe you ought to look at how you relate to people here.

Aren't hipsters all about simplicity, Apple products and so on? If I am a hipster, does that make PC gaming easier?

Wait, I can't be a hipster because computer gaming is usually cheaper than consoles, and you know hipsters always pay for the expensive stuff.

Can I call you a hipster too? Because you like consoles?

This looks like a wall of nonsense, so I'm going to ignore it.

Let's just end this non-sense, I have nothing against your choice, but calling every PC gamer a masochist bigot is crossing the line.

You're right, it is! Now please show me the quote where I did that. Or rather, don't, because this doesn't seem to be a conversation, I'm going to check out of it. Adios!

 

[Artemis923]

They have no need to release a console. Period.

Seems to me they're jealous of Nintendo's shiny new toy and are trying to crank out a hunk of shit to compete.

I loved my original 'box, and I love my 360...because they're GAMING CONSOLES. I already own a laptop with superior hardware that runs everything smooth as a baby's bum. I by console games because...well...because that's what the damned thing is for. I guess I'll save myself $400+ bucks if they decide to force this abomination into the market.

 

[ElPatron]

You're right, it is! Now please show me the quote where I did that.

you don't have to deal with all the other shit that PC players seem to enjoy.

Enjoying "shit" = masochism

 

[GonzoGamer]

But don't people get a console so they don't have to do all that.
If you're going to go through all that may as well play the PC and get mods and everything too.
They're also going to have to start posting system requirements on console games now too.

That's exactly what I was thinking, but if they make the parts as easy to change as the hard drive is for the 360 It won't be too bad. If they make it so u have to unscrew everything and fiddle with tiny chips and wires, no-one other than people who already do that stuff with their PC's is going to go for it.

It would have to be an ejectable solid part like the 360 hard-drive that holds both the GPU and CPU together for the mainstream market to bother with it.

I have no doubt that the parts will be easily interchangeable; mostly so they can make it a patented proprietary part that they can sell exclusively at an inflated price. But they'll be sure to make it clean & easy.
I'm more worried about how the consumer will shop for games. We already have to negotiate through drive space; make sure we have enough space to install the game and sometime that can be quite large. Console gamers don't want to have to sort through system requirements.
If there's one thing they should learn from the fall of the Playstation brand is that a console should be a cheap, simple, and utilitarian alternative to gaming on the PC.

 

[-|-]

I agree, but I think there were only 2 reasons that the N64 survived that:
1.) It was a literal 30 second replacement. It took no time and small kids could do it with minimal effort.
2.) The Nintendo 64 was DOMINATING the market. The Play Station had yet to really "take off" so to speak so Nintendo really didn't stand to lose that much. Whereas today well I think people just couldn't be bothered to do all that. If I have to go through all that trouble to buy new components for my gaming console I would just buy a PC. I don't think I'm alone in this.

1 is correct. 2, I don't think is right. The N64 was trying to catch up since the start. It's launch was badly handled at too a high a price and the games weren't up to much for a while (apart from a few notable exceptions) - I know because I was a day one N64 owner. The playstation, on the other hand, had been out a long time already, and had significant sales before you could even get your hands on the nintendo console.

Personally, I think the main reason that the upgrade was popular was simply that it came free with Donkey Kong 64. Rare was synonymous with quality back then (what with goldeneye and banjo kazooie) so a large part of the N64 install base would have bought that game. I know I did - even though I thought it sucked after playing it for a few hours.

 

[T.A.R.D.U.S]

Don't want. Let people who have the time and can put in the effort have their Mods for their PC's and leave the console what it is; An easy to use piece of equipment that gets the job done. I want to play my games and not pay out the ass for them, that's why I have an Xbox 360. I don't need the best graphics, I don't want to spend more money on upgrading what is already a working product.

I know this isn't going to happen, but this also worries me into thinking that if it were to come out the would make games where you needed upgrade x to play it... essentially ruining the experience further. I know it is a long shot, but I had bad experiences as a child trying to play the roller coaster tycoon and Oregon trail Series, where they forced you to get certain cards to play them. PC peeps can keep that crap, just give me the console and the controler.