Microsoft unifying PC/XB1 platforms, Phil implies Xbox moving to incremental upgrades

Another thing to consider is this, the actual cost of upgrades wouldn't be as steep as it seems. Just think if you could upgrade every 2-3 years and trade in your older model system for $200 off the cost of you upgrade. Essentially spending only around $199 every 2 to 3 years for better performance. Its perfectly sustainable
 
I'm curious as to how they're going to make this work. So, all Xbox One games will become UWA, and new Xbox games will also be UWA, right?

And the UWA games will be able to run on Xbox One, PC, and new Xbox hardware at different level of performance (fps, resolution, AA, etc.)?

I guess that's the end goal, but I'm not sure how they're going to make this work. I thought Xbox One games were coded to the metal, so not sure how they could become UWA all of a sudden...

New hardware should just behave like an original XBO in the case of original XBO games unless someone goes back and patches them. UWA games will see the benefits.
That's my guess.
 
What about PS4...they should do the same. I would like to play some of the PS4 title on PC like Resogun....which has been tied down to the console for ages.
 
I guess that's the end goal, but I'm not sure how they're going to make this work. I thought Xbox One games were coded to the metal, so not sure how they could become UWA all of a sudden...

Realistically, they'll have to give up some performance by introducing some abstraction. However, you can still achieve better performance/optimization if you only need to target a few specs, versus infinite combinations of CPU's and GPU's.
 
I said it when the PS4 was mentioned as doing this and I'll say it again. Won't happen, won't work if it did. Dumbest thing they could do.
 
All this does is make PS4 more of a potential purchase. Consumers like simplicity.

Assuming Sony's not doing the same thing.

It's still simple. Do people get all confused by the newest phones, tablet or computer?

Of course not. It's still plays the same games.
 
Because phones are subsidised by carriers, you won't get a large proportion of phone users dropping £600+ every twelve/twenty four months upgrading their phones.

Most people sell their phone when the contract is up, and use it towards a new one. Anyone on the iPhone / Galaxy train certainly do.
 
They're going to bring along Steam at some point guys.

A Steam app with integrated profiles for the "xbox" hardware, running games under Windows 10.
 
Will a mod please do me a favor and just go ahead and Permaban me? Too many people go way out of their way to make news seem negative and I think it will be better for me to just not be a member. Thanks.

It is. I just don't want to be tempted to be a part of it. Please help mod quickly!!!
Wouldn't it be quicker to just PM a mod?
Plus unlike consoles, phones are seen as an essential device.
Plus, Phones are seen as a status symbol/something to brag about.
 
How are they any different other than the input?

Phones are a neccessity. You might as well be saying that people buying milk or laundry detergent every month means they will be willing to upgrade their consoles. Most people can justify in their minds spending a few hundred dollars every couple of years on something they are going to use every single day (and it helps that carrier plans are set up to help them hide the real cost, out of sight out of mind). versus something in a game console the general public still largely probably views as a toy and something that, at best, most will probably use once or twice a week. People don't even upgrade their televisions that often and those are probably much more essential than a video game console.
 
This is me too. I'm shocked at the positive comments. This is where I'll get off the train.
Then only buy once every five years or whatever and play the same games that the rest of us would be playing only at a lower resolution or graphics setting.

Not seeing why this model has any negatives other than a marginally increased testing overhead for developers.
 
I doubt that introducing more skus and revisions into the market is somehow going to cause people to buy more consoles. I just don't see where the market is asking for anything like this? All we've heard for the last 18 months is how the ps4 is underpowered and how PC ports look and perform so much better and yet, the console is selling like hot cakes and likely will have a super successful and healthy run over the next 3 or 4 years. Who is asking for a more powerful ps4 in 2016? Would it make any sense for Sony to spend the resources necessary to release a new console revision?

It doesn't sound like Microsoft is proposing console revisions. Simply expandability off of an existing baseline SKU to theoretically expand the console's processing/graphical capabilities. We know people are willing to do it for PC gaming, and that might be due to the fact that there's an existing precedent to do so - but who knows? The closest thing we have is the introduction of a new 'platform' within an existing platform, ie. Kinect, Morpheus, etc.
 
They need to have some sort of upgrade program for me to be interested in this. If I can trade in my current console to get more than 50% off the new one, I might be down with this. However, I don't know how much of a market there is for this type of things. Phones are necessities for a lot of people, Xbox Ones are not.
 
Speaking of phones I wonder if a console subsidised by Xbox Live will happen again? Perhaps if multiplayer on console is brought out to silver members that would be a new way to use that service.
 
You can replace phone with tablets and achieve the same point you are trying to make.

Replacing phones with tablets completely destroys the point you and he keep trying to make because consumers are NOT upgrading their tablets with anywhere near the frequency of their phones. It's like, only the biggest issue facing the tablet market.
 
Why? The way we currently do it is absurd. Let's play a system for 10 years invest dollars in games and then poof! They are all gone and we start over.

As I said it depends on how many times they bring out newer models. If it is yearly by time the 3rd or 4th year Xbox comes the launch one would run like crap. I buy a console because I like to be able to make it last 5+ years. Upgradiing it all the time would make me think twice before buying one.
 
$100 more hardware won't do much. Certainly not 30 to 60 fps boost

A Polaris AMD APU in the same class as the PS4s, except improved on a smaller die, slightly, more shaders, faster clocks, etc, could beat the ps4 I'm assuming fairly easily. A $250 Xbox One and and $400 higher performance model doesn't sound preposterous to me in 2017. In 2017 a $400 upgraded Xbox sku should easily beat the PS4.
 
It's still simple. Do people get all confused by the newest phones, tablet or computer?

Of course not. It's still plays the same games.

Consoles are not phones and tablets. Consumers invest a few hundred dollars for 1 box that plays games and last at least 5 years. That is and will always be the expectation.
 
The thing is the parts that need to be changed for upgrading is the CPU, GPU & RAM so how is this going to be done, being able to swap out the CPU, GPU & RAM if this is the case then MS/XBOX are going to have to have some special designs to stop third parties getting involved in supplying the components because it will otherwise be a game of never being able to catch up.

They are saying that it's going to be backwards compatible, but what about forwards compatible, will the latest releases still work on un-upgraded Xboxes (by latest release I am talking about a game that pushes the console to it's limits, like GTAV on the PS3/X360) I just think that all this will do is fragment the market way too much, the point of a console is that you spend £300 in it & you know that all the games will work as best as they can for the next six years or so.
 
It doesn't sound like Microsoft is proposing console revisions. Simply expandability off of an existing baseline SKU to theoretically expand the console's processing/graphical capabilities. We know people are willing to do it for PC gaming, and that might be due to the fact that there's an existing precedent to do so - but who knows? The closest thing we have is the introduction of a new 'platform' within an existing platform, ie. Kinect, Morpheus, etc.
No it does sound like what they're proposing. You won't be sending your XBO back in a coffin for them to stick an updated motherboard in it. They want it to.be more like selling tablets/notebooks etc.
 
The main problem doing incremental design is that a lot of the Xbox crowd picked the console up because it dropped so fast in price. I'd reckon that those are the people who'd fork out cash in order for the best possible experience. Heck, I'm not cheap and I'd still think twice about upgrading a console.
 
Replacing phones with tablets completely destroys the point you and he keep trying to make because consumers are NOT upgrading their tablets with anywhere near the frequency of their phones. It's like, only the biggest issue facing the tablet market.

Okay, then you upgrade less on tablets. Cool. Then you'll upgrade less on consoles. Again, cool. It's your choice, but at least I want that choice.
 
I wonder if people proclaiming no one would buy an upgraded Xbox / PS4 are the same people who upgrade their phones every 18 months.

Yeah, they upgrade them on subsidized plans for a fraction of the phone's cost. Unless MS pursues something similar, and console subsidization catches on (remember, the 360 had a subsidized plan through Best Buy after 2010 that didn't catch on), then consoles will never have the same iterative release schedule as smartphones & tablets. Phones & tablets are just infinitely more versatile & valued as such when compared to a console. It would never work.
 
For lack of a better term this seems desperate. If Xbox was the platform leader this generation there would be none of this talk, especially this early in the console lifespan.

Phil should just keep building the Xbox brand, make great games and have good PC support. Build back the trust with the consumer, which I think they have been doing, so that when the next Xbox is coming out they get a great start.
 
The main problem doing incremental design is that a lot of the Xbox crowd picked the console up because it dropped so fast in price. I'd reckon that those are the people who'd fork out cash in order for the best possible experience. Heck, I'm not cheap and I'd still think twice about upgrading a console.

This is another issue. We are at a stage in this co sole life cycle, two years in, where a lot of the people making purchasing decisions are much more price conscious. They are looking for price drops and deals. Introducing a brand new $400-500 console and expecting these consumers to jump at it seems crazy. So you are left asking the early adopters who just dropped $300-400 on a new console in the last 18 months to do it again. Just don't see it happening.
 
Top Bottom