The console space is getting dated. Software catalogs will begin to matter more. Hardware's just one of those gateways to the software.
Microsoft unifying PC/XB1 platforms, Phil implies Xbox moving to incremental upgrades
- Thread starter dancrane212
- Start date
The console space is getting dated. Software catalogs will begin to matter more. Hardware's just one of those gateways to the software.
Roberto Larcos
Member
As they do on PC?
General graphics stuff: low / medium / high
Resolution: 720p / 900p / 1080p / 1440p
Frame rate: 30 fps / 60 fps / not getting more than this on console.
Xbox One runs it at 900p and 30fps with some graphics settings turned a fair bit down (draw distance, textures etc.).
Xbox Two runs it at 1080p and 60fps with better textures, better AA etc..
If the upgrades were every 3/4 years, there would still only be 2 SKUs. It would also ensure that the differences are big enough that consumers actually care. But the best part for Microsoft? Even the 'old' hardware runs it about the same as a PS4, and the same-ish console price. With the same length tail on support.
DeathoftheEndless
Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
This sounds fantastic. Finally there would be eternal backwards compatibility for consoles.
Tatsumi Oga
Banned
I see, I guess it's a logical step for Microsoft. Should be interesting to see how it a plays out and how the competition will react. I am not sure yet what to think of this however. I really like my Xbox One and there's a reason I quit PC gaming a long time ago. I just hope MS is doing the right thing here.
Unless MS allow you to change settings on the Xbox then it will happen. A game released 2 to 3 yrs after launch, would play like shit on the launch Xbox.
Both the PC market and the mobile market have shown that this can work if done properly. It's practically the idea behind the Steam machines, but properly supported. Owning Windows and having the experience of developing consoles should allow Microsoft to build good cheap medium range PCs with fixed configuration as "consoles" every 3-4 years.
They wont disallow anything, but as soon as the features and benefits of going Universal Windows App are greater than using win32 for developers, games will be windows store only.
Gabe knew this was the plan.
Xbox would still be a completely locked down and easy to use device, with games specifically targeting and tested against it.
It is an interesting idea, but what you need first is a robust concept. However that would look like I do not know.
Second or maybe first you need the software or games.
Next generation is a new chance for MS. This generation I would say is a no go. MS would kill off the current Xbox One, need of new introduction of the hardware update and possible higher cost than competition, customers could get confused and Sony could build on the momentum of PS4 and maybe PS4 slim and further price cuts.
Second or maybe first you need the software or games.
Next generation is a new chance for MS. This generation I would say is a no go. MS would kill off the current Xbox One, need of new introduction of the hardware update and possible higher cost than competition, customers could get confused and Sony could build on the momentum of PS4 and maybe PS4 slim and further price cuts.
Buy a system which will run your entire library of games until you are ready to move to the next upgrade and get better performance. You would probably be fine for 2-3 years and maybe even beyond that.
Not as much improvement as last gen I agree, but the bolded part of your quote is completely false.
The Artisan
Member
the handheld consoles have mostly the same hardware though, and the same games playable on any iteration
I would imagine the platform more or less stays the same, but somewhere on the box it would just state a minimum hardware version. For example they could have a strip at the top of the box art that simply says "Xbox One Version 2 or newer required to play".
You keep explaining shit I already know/understand.
Assuming this idea comes to fruition, you could expect the 2017 or 2018 Surface to have a big 'Supported Xbox Device' sticker on the box, as you could with any capable full Windows 10 machine.
The only trick for something like a Surface is making sure the store prevents/warns you from buying games/apps that your system is below the minimum requirements for, which would likely be necessary for the annual console/PC upgrade strategy anyway.
Their plan is to deprecate win32, not remove it. And they have been doing just that since win8.
Ol No Bones
Banned
Some people are just obtuse aren't they. Think IOS and IPhone revisions. Think surface 1,2 and 3. Just think. Most people don't want to swap parts in a PC and like the simplicity of a console but would upgrade every couple years if given the option. This is just more options. It's a good thing. If everyone wanted to be PC gamers they would be PC gamers already. It's still just as easy to use they just release more frequently.
SneakersSO
Member
The new hardware will likely feature an x86 CPU, but even with that, there is still a bunch of effort that would go into building out an additional version of a game. Unless MS plans on replicating the APU in the X1 with beefier specs in their new iterations (and at this point, why stick to ESRAM/DDR3), then I still have a bunch of work I have to do on the coding side, which results in a lot more QA work that i'm gonna need to do to potentially sell to a fraction of the X1 install base.
Or, I could just make an X1 version, and MS port-forwards it via emulation. That could work.
ViolentP
Member
Except the part where your neighbor can run a game better than you on the same console.
I wonder what Valve's response will be if this is legit. This is basically the nuclear option that they were afraid of, and the reason we got SteamOS/Steam Machines in the first place.
If Microsoft gives small developers the tools to easily create PC ports through the XB1 platform and release them on the Windows PC store, I can't see why they would spend any additional money to port them elsewhere. Steam will finally have a competitor with real teeth.
If Microsoft gives small developers the tools to easily create PC ports through the XB1 platform and release them on the Windows PC store, I can't see why they would spend any additional money to port them elsewhere. Steam will finally have a competitor with real teeth.
Out of all this news over the last few weeks this is probably the best part of it. And makes sense why MS did B/C with 360 to XBO.
At the same time, I will wait for the dust to settle before getting an XBO now.
Oh the horror.
Wrong.
Chill Penguin
Member
Love the idea honestly. Top of the line hardware with the perks of plug and play consoles? Backward and forward compatibility? If this is priced right it could be big.
Dinky Dino
Member
Why do people keep assuming the entire hardware will be replaced? They said upgradable. As in pop video card out new one in. Also if you don't want to upgrade you can just stay at the same level MS won't cut you loose for a typical console lifespan. It's no different than pcs playing multiplats at better visual quality or framerate like they do now. Don't you want the choice of having that option? By the end of the 360 gen games were running sub 10 and sub 20 fps regularly. This also means games won't be downgraded.
Upgrading for the xbox will likely be way cheaper than on the pc because they can buy parts in bulk. Or you send in your box and they do it for you.
Roberto Larcos
Member
Added benefit; it would allow Microsoft to compete with Sony in the console VR space sooner. Otherwise they're waiting until 2020-or-so, when they'd traditionally release the higher powered box.
I suppose if they really just care about Windows 10 adoption and write off hardware but I'm sure a lot of people would see the transition and be really pissed. It might kill off Xbox if people didn't see the sense of owning one. They might just go PC or get an alternate console.
Guess what? You won't need their box to play their games then, just play them on your PC.
See? Hardware won't matter, you just play the games.
You get in to their catalog. Look at the big picture people.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I'm saying this again, because my previous post got lost in the thread merger. This was the likely direction for Microsoft to take, and we should have predicted it since the 2012 leak of the Xbox roadmap:
The important part is "complete Xbox experience, any time, any where, any screen". Streaming is not the complete experience.
The important part is "complete Xbox experience, any time, any where, any screen". Streaming is not the complete experience.
Ol No Bones
Banned
Then do you have a reason to think it's a shitty idea or are you just telling us your gut?
Chill Penguin
Member
Oh so you're worried about the potential console warrior reaction.
Shrennin
Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
How? The ease-of-use and single hardware investment comes from the basic model. The basic model will eventually run into problems that current systems do (FPS vs Resolution, or other technical specs not being up to par with PC). You'll still get the console style with the basic model, but if you want both high resolution and FPS or other technical abilities not possible for current gen then the upgrades will allow for that. This could even benefit the base model by allowing the consumer to choose between resolution or FPS or other features. I still take it that there will be console generations when technology improves a lot, but the cycles may be longer as the upgrades are there to advance the Xbox platform with incremental technological upgrades until that point (and if you choose).
All they are doing is adding choice. It's not going to change the console space in terms of ease-of-use or single investment. Microsoft is trying to leverage both benefits between console and PC space with this move. We aren't even sure yet how upgrades will work or how they will be sold.
They will likely do what PC gamers have to do. Suck it up. If they want to play the latest all singing and dancing game, they have to have the right spec. Or you can play it on your current system and have to dial things down.
Tech is not shifting that fast that a 1 year gap would have a system that utterly destroys the previous one. Especially if they are not planning to drop a $2000 price tag on it.
Alot of pc gamers buy a solid CPU and ram config with a decent motherboard and then upgrade there GPUs every 2years possibly 3 and unless there is a PCI jump or standard change, typically have no issues with architecture compatibility with the gpu to cpu to ram interaction. So I frankly do not understand what you are talking about above.
I for example bought a 2600k, 16gigs (@ 1600mhz)back in fall 2011 and have had a 560ti, 760 and now a 980ti in my system config with no issues motherboard problems with compatibility or any real significant performance loss when compared to my graphical gains and my ability to play on newer graphic engines. Every year for a while now CPU gains have not been that significant which is why many people are still rocking second Gen cpus. (Maybe your argument would have made more sense if applied if your were referring to a quad core ddr2 system config going to a hyperthreading one with ddr3, as that was a big arch and performance jump).
So spending a little extra on the front end aka in cpu and ram helps provide longevity and future upgradeability and will allow for prolonged swapping out of graphics as needed for am extended time.
You missed the point. "Put in a new video card every few years? That I have to buy to keep up with the Jones's? Like a PC? Forget it."
yeah I wonder how they will handle the online space if there are different performance profiles.
It is definetly a way to leave the traditional home console business.
It's clear they're sick of the investements required to make a home console a success and when returns are not what you expected the game isn't worth it.
In this way they can promote their Windows 10 PC ecosystem and the Xbox is relegated to a low risk strategy of customized terminals to play such PC games.
Caipirinha
Member
It's just how it is objectively speaking. I know it's a big shock to gamers when a console manufacturer leaves the competition but from a corporate perspective, particularly after the reshuffle, it's looked like a likely outcome for a long time. MS is losing ground in it's home markets like productivity and operating systems and they are all guns blazing on that front while making major withdrawals from devices, which makes perfect sense given that without Windows and Office the company would pretty much cease to exist overnight, whereas without Xbox, next to nothing would change.
The higher ups at MS probably don't care too much what happens to the Xbox hardware division and probably only very slightly more about the brand, but suddenly announcing that they are ceasing production and/or development of future consoles would be seen to traders that aren't even particularly interested in the Xbox as reason to lose confidence in the company as a whole.
That's why a publicly traded corp as big as MS would always try to put a less negative spin on it, but that's nevertheless pretty clearly what's happening here.
Nevermind, I guess we will see who steps in to compete with Sony or whether or not the console market finally does change beyond recognition when it comes to the next cycle.
vasametropolis
Member
I am neither happy nor sad they are thinking of moving to the upgrade approach at this point... just want to rub in that I made a thread discussing this months ago and got collectively shit on by GAF when it seemed so clear one of the companies would try it. 
True, Apple have that market (and while I do not understand it), it's there and has been working for them so far. I guess with last generation and how it dragged on, plus the move towards a closer architecture to PC, this is the future consoles are heading towards (at least in the developers' minds). I've just always seen PC and consoles as two separate things with their own positives and negatives, and I just don't see Microsoft taking the best aspects of each platform and mixing them - how the current AAA games on their store work are not encouraging.
Sure, but at that point, getting an actual PC is looking mighty tempting. I can't see proprietary Xbox-branded hardware upgrades being cheaper than the equivalent components in the PC market.
I think this might all be a big transition for Microsoft to get out of the console space. I think this generation could very well be their last. They are moving all their franchises to W10, slowly merging the XB1 into a PC/W10 device. There's room for the Xbox to just be pre-built PC's.
Edit: I see this idea has been floating around already.
My gut.
I can see this being a successful course of action. I personally just hate the idea of purchasing a new updated console after only 3 or 4 years. This is like a dream come true for those always complaining about console cycles being too long, I was never one of them.
LOL, I figured you did. I am just not seeing how it is a shitty idea. Those who want to can upgrade sooner and the rest of us can ride out a system for a little longer if we want. And all systems will have to be within a range that will run the games with proper optimization. Seems okay to me.
How is this issue different than how it currently is on PC and mobile?
ViolentP
Member
It's called fragmenting your userbase. A big reason many tend to stick with consoles is because they don't need to worry about this kind of thing. They plug it in and they play. For there to be value in upgrading components, there would ultimately have to be enough disparity between performance that some games would be rendered unplayable on older hardware.
You would be forcing many console gamers into doing something they have tried to avoid in PC gaming.