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

That's how it's always been on PC. Never been a problem 'til this thread

But with PC everyone depending on your hardware isn't forced if they don;t want all eye candy just steady frames. ANd you can pay 15 dollars for a better ether net card. OR you can buy a slightly better card for a small amount if you look.

Consoles you are locked pre-which hardware version you have. PC if someone has an edge over you there are ways to compensate, like lower settings, configure your Ethernet port, or third party software for bandwidth throttling.

You will not have that on console, it's locked system.

The console you buy in 2015 doesn't start performing worse because someone else buys a more powerful one in 2017.

Correct but it will not have the same advantages as the newer box. And will be inferior if games really use those new revision features.
 
Now imagine that your console worked EXACTLY like it already does, with the addition that every two or three years you have the OPTION of buying a new GPU for it that you simply slot into the side of the box. Your 1080p 30fps games now typically run at 60fps after the first upgrade. The second upgrade, four years after launch, allows for 1440p 60fps gaming, or 4k 30fps gaming. Or you can choose to stick with what you have at 1080p 30fps.

Does that kill the Xbox brand? Or does it simply provide another reason to consider buying the Xbox over the competition's offerings? Because I'm pretty sure that's all they're going for here.

Agreed. And it's easy to see that The games now are so tied to a system software / apis than never.

So The logical path for MS is that.
 
Can some of xplain to me how this would impact the console "advantage" please? The fact that using set hardware allows for optimization and such would no longer exist right? Or would it just become another PC graphics card arms race type situation?

The console advantage is long gone. Xbox 360 / PS3 might have had a slight edge in some scenarios over PCs, but PS4 / Xbox one is inferior in every aspect compared to a modern PC.
 
Games running better has been almost the entire basis for the PS4 being superior.

Every single Xbox One owner is at a current disadvantage that they cannot get away from unless they fork out another $500
But there is not a single cross platform multiplayer game between them.
 
Where would the motivation be as a dev in making my game run better on XB1 when I know there's a platform coming in the next year that will enhance my framerate without me having to do any additional work?

None as long as you don't mind a few years of people complaining about the bad framerate.
 
Not going to constantly chase upgrades of a console to try to keep a solid 30fps in games. Locked framerats are rare enough as it is. This would push me off the Xbox ecosystem.
 
I would buy a more powerful ps4 that ran uncharted 4 or ffxv at 60 fps. This is a great idea

No offense, but this is a egocentric-only view. I know what you're trying to say, but please think about those who might regret their purchase if something like this happens. If they adapt, it will hurt the industry.

I'm planning on buying a new PC this year. I have the money and I'm pretty excited. Do I run into the next store throwing my euros around? No, because I want to get the best value for my money. So, GAF told me to wait for the new gen of GFX and I will listen, because I can wait for another 6 month.

Are people really comparing the phone market to console gaming?
Let's say every second E3 new iterations are announced and released in October/November of the same year. Who in the right mind is going to buy the older model in the month between E3 and release date?
 
i assume that they'd introduce rolling cut-offs for hardware support or this would very quickly become pointless. xbox two might just run all the same games as xbox one but in 1080p and 60fps, but you'd have a hard time convincing people to shell out for an xbox three that runs xbox one and xbox two games, just at 4k and 60fps. you'd have to cut off support for xbox one at some point so that games only run on xbox two and xbox three.

but in theory i don't necessarily see the drawback. people who want the latest and greatest would just buy the newest console whenever it comes out; people who don't care as much could buy every other revision (the 'S' version, if you're talking in terms of iphone). if the revised versions came out every 3 years then that would mean six years between each hardware cutoff point.
 
How it could work:
- W10 upgrade with Xbox mode (dual OS)
- licence 'Xbox' to hardware manufacturers
- using Xboxlive as a service on W10, making it a 1:1 PS3 era copy of PSN
(sales, free monthly games, server support)

What I don't see happening:
- Xbox 2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3

Xbox lost share this gen. Why should they fracture their userbase even more?
Please keep in mind that this industry is all front-loaded. Xbox 2 can't afford having customers being undecided, waiting for a year or two because they will then buy Xbox 2.1 so that their favourite game runs better. What's the purpose of owning a console then? Are people really expecting that 50$ upgrades will make their console run every game @ 1080p/60FPS?
I really would regret my PS4 purchase if Sony released a PS4.5 in a year from now.
If I add the 400$ PS4 to the 400$ for a PS4.5, I can buy a PC for that money. Do people believe that you will get a GTX980TI level graphics upgrade in 2 years that fits in your XboxTwo chasis? To be fair, I definetely would pay 100$ for a PS4 upgrade that runs a game like Bloodborne @60fps. I'm not sure how this could work though, when 90% of games after release run like shit on what we have now.

This.

I said something not unlike your post although not as specific.

This sheds a little light on MS making Xbox the box absolete and making Xbox the brand a service/platform.

I think your spot on, I just don't see MS fragmenting the Xbox userbase.

Is this a good move for MS? Dunno.
 
Bring it on. If this means I can get every console going forward to be complete backwards comparable with my already vast Xbone collection. Fucking bring it MS.

Will I upgrade every year? No. I don't buy a new phone every year, but every 3-5? Fuck yes. Why make a new console? Just bring out faster and stronger iterations of the Xbone and bring the entire games catalog forward.

Xbone is a solid box, and if this keeps the overal structure and quality, and the entire library with it, then bring it. You already have Live, a good OS, and the best controller on the market. Fuck it. Make the next Xbox just a stronger Bone. And if it's on an upgrade cycle of every two years or so, so be it. If it gives me every game at 1080x60 then I'll take it.

And old models won't exactly have to worry. Look how far the 360 and PS3 brought us. Even with an upgraded device on the market, the current Bone can last for quite some time, hell even longer than some of the shit some PC gamers play with thanks to optimization bringing out every last ounce of performance.
 
Now imagine that your console worked EXACTLY like it already does, with the addition that every two or three years you have the OPTION of buying a new GPU for it that you simply slot into the side of the box. Your 1080p 30fps games now typically run at 60fps after the first upgrade. The second upgrade, four years after launch, allows for 1440p 60fps gaming, or 4k 30fps gaming. Or you can choose to stick with what you have at 1080p 30fps.

Does that kill the Xbox brand? Or does it simply provide another reason to consider buying the Xbox over the competition's offerings? Because I'm pretty sure that's all they're going for here.

Good in theory. Problem is there is more that goes into resolution and fps than just the GPU. What about upgrading the CPU? The higher the GPU the more power supply you need. What about the RAM speed? Can it sustain what the GPU and CPU is asking it to do or do you need to upgrade that as well?
 
Both. Xbox would be competing with PCs if it were to go this route.

This is what I was thinking may happen too. Of course it may be subsidized making it more palatable.

The console advantage is long gone. Xbox 360 / PS3 might have had a slight edge in some scenarios over PCs, but PS4 / Xbox one is inferior in every aspect to compared to a modern PC.

No, that's not what I'm talking about
 
It's just a way to say they give up on console gaming and Xbox. An upgradable console makes zero sense, it's the opposite of a console.

PC would be superior in every way to an upgradable console. People play consoles because of simplicity and convenience. And because they don't need to upgrade them for years.
 
Where are you getting these prices and time frames? $500 a year isn't realistic.
To be honest I made them up but it's not going to be cheaper than the current/weaker box. No matter the pricing/timeframe is besides the point really.
Games running better has been almost the entire basis for the PS4 being superior.

Every single Xbox One owner is at a current disadvantage that they cannot get away from unless they fork out another $500
I don't play with PS4 gamers though, how am I at a disadvantage there? I'm not.


The console you buy in 2015 doesn't start performing worse because someone else buys a more powerful one in 2017.
I never said it does?
 
i assume that they'd introduce rolling cut-offs for hardware support or this would very quickly become pointless. xbox two might just run all the same games as xbox one but in 1080p and 60fps, but you'd have a hard time convincing people to shell out for an xbox three that runs xbox one and xbox two games, just at 4k and 60fps. you'd have to cut off support for xbox one at some point so that games only run on xbox two and xbox three.

Of course, in time, and it's how it works now except your games will still work.
 
Can some of xplain to me how this would impact the console "advantage" please? The fact that using set hardware allows for optimization and such would no longer exist right? Or would it just become another PC graphics card arms race type situation?

It's just a "steambox" running Windows 10 that gets re-released every year/couple years.

It can't even be labelled a console at that point I think, so yeah no closed hardware advantages.
 
Now imagine that your console worked EXACTLY like it already does, with the addition that every two or three years you have the OPTION of buying a new GPU for it that you simply slot into the side of the box. Your 1080p 30fps games now typically run at 60fps after the first upgrade. The second upgrade, four years after launch, allows for 1440p 60fps gaming, or 4k 30fps gaming. Or you can choose to stick with what you have at 1080p 30fps.

Does that kill the Xbox brand? Or does it simply provide another reason to consider buying the Xbox over the competition's offerings? Because I'm pretty sure that's all they're going for here.

But they wouldn't have to go that route if they weren't getting their asses handed to them. ANd developers wouldn't put up a stink about it being underpowered if they had developed the hardware properly the first time.

This is only going the way of trying to correct the problem they have had this whole generation.

They seemed to have no issue last gen, and there was no talk about this even in teh slightest during x360 days leading up to xbone reveal.

Having more variables for developers to worry about is not a sound idea. It did not work out for sega.
 
i assume that they'd introduce rolling cut-offs for hardware support or this would very quickly become pointless. xbox two might just run all the same games as xbox one but in 1080p and 60fps, but you'd have a hard time convincing people to shell out for an xbox three that runs xbox one and xbox two games, just at 4k and 60fps. you'd have to cut off support for xbox one at some point so that games only run on xbox two and xbox three.

Thanx for saying what I have been trying to get across in far better words.
 
Games running better has been almost the entire basis for the PS4 being superior.

Every single Xbox One owner is at a current disadvantage that they cannot get away from unless they fork out another $500

You're not at a disadvantage to other Xbox One owners though, you are playing at the same resolution and framerate.
 
To be honest I made them up but it's not going to be cheaper than the current/weaker box. No matter the pricing/timeframe is besides the point really.

I don't play with PS4 gamers though, how am I at a disadvantage there? I'm not.



I never said it does?

So you are saying you will be at a competitive disadvantage when you play competitive games online, that wasn't clear.

Unless you've forked out $150 for an Elite pad, you are at a competitive disadavtange there too.
 
What's that got to do the with the concept that people won't buy a newer machine?
You aren't at a disadvantage because that other console runs it better. You are getting the exact same experience as van every one else in the multiplayer.
 
The console you buy in 2015 doesn't start performing worse because someone else buys a more powerful one in 2017.

False, exactly as it happens on PC.

Developers optimize and target for the best, and you are left with a far worse game.

Imagine making a movie in 4:3, then you get to make another one in 16:9. But you also have to make it retro-compatible and so you cut the margins to have it also in 4:3.

In the end a native 4:3 movie is okay, because it's built and meant that way. Whereas a 16:9 movie cut to 4:3 just sucks because it was planned and developed for a different format.
 
You think a userbase, after a year or two, would view Xbox One A at a $200 price point, when Xbox One B just launched, and Xbox One A has a guaranteed far shorter software shelf life ahead of it? How much longer do you think Xbox One A will be supported software wise? On top of that, do you think devs are just going to support it if MS can't prove each individual install base can't reach a threshold of profitability?

1. Yes I do think that consumers will continue to buy the older cheaper product.

2. I expect each revision would support software for at least 5 years aka a standard console generation

3. Devs will support it just like they support a huge range of PC hardware right now. I mean devs are literally already doing this at scale.
 
The problem with people claiming that it will be just as simple as it is now, and you can just upgrade as often as you feel like, and only upgrade every 5-6 years if you want to, and you don't have to mess with settings if you don't want to, is that no, of course it fucking won't be as simple as it is now. Microsoft might make an effort to make it simple, and they will sure as hell try to convince you it's simple, but it won't be anywhere near as simple. Sure, theoretically your box will be forwards-compatible for five years and will just work for you. But in practice, it's gonna look a hell of a lot more like this:


Hey, you want that game in that series you love, but guess what? The developer decided to make it only two generations backwards-compatible instead of three, because they didn't want to put in the effort to optimize it for your model. So you're shit out of luck. How about that other game? Oh, damn, its performance is good on other models, but shitty on your model. Shoot. At least you always remember to obsessively check Digital Foundry before every purchase, a thing you need to do now that performance and developer effort can vary wildly between models!

Well, how about this third game? You'd better look up its performance too. Looks good! No wait, shit. It only gets a stable framerate on the special edition of your model. You know, the one with the overclocked GPU, the one that came out 6 months later with that FIFA game bundled in. Yeah, that one.

Maybe you should look into upgrading your machine's hardware? Some of these machines can be upgraded; you know that. But you're just an average-Joe consumer, and you don't even really know what phrases like "CPU" and "RAM" mean. But you do the annoying research to figure it all out. But alas, the specific hardware upgrade you wanted isn't available for your model. No, wait; they used to have it, but it was discontinued last month. Now it's really expensive on eBay. Shit!

Perhaps you could tweak the settings. But you hate messing with settings. You don't want to game on a PC. That's why you bought a console. Microsoft promised it would just work. You sigh.

You're feeling a little frustrated when your programmer friend happens to call you up. He's been making an indie game and it's been going well. But shit, he's getting really nervous about optimizing and testing his game on a half a dozen different Xbox models. He's really thinking of just releasing the game on Playstation. Shoot, you were really looking forward to trying his game.

Maybe you should consider just buying a newer model? But they're so expensive now that Microsoft releases so many of them, each needing its own round of R&D and stress testing and everything else that goes into designing and manufacturing hardware. You miss the days where developers could afford to take a loss on hardware, since they only had to sink those hardware design costs every 6 years or so.

You think about it. And then it hits you. Just buy a fucking Playstation. Because there's only one of those on the market, and it actually does just work™.
 
Now imagine that your console worked EXACTLY like it already does, with the addition that every two or three years you have the OPTION of buying a new GPU for it that you simply slot into the side of the box. Your 1080p 30fps games now typically run at 60fps after the first upgrade. The second upgrade, four years after launch, allows for 1440p 60fps gaming, or 4k 30fps gaming. Or you can choose to stick with what you have at 1080p 30fps.

Does that kill the Xbox brand? Or does it simply provide another reason to consider buying the Xbox over the competition's offerings? Because I'm pretty sure that's all they're going for here.


Yes, but to play Halo 21, you need to upgrade, to play Halo 23, you need to upgrade, to play Halo 24... Halo 23 machine can handle Halo24 at reduced settings, but not Halo 21 machine.

Personally, I am fine with that. But I prefer PC.
 
It's just a "steambox" running Windows 10 that gets re-released every year/couple years.

It can't even be labelled a console at that point I think, so yeah no closed hardware advantages.

There can still be closed hw advantages, you could give a ps4 double the ram, double the the transfer speed, double the clockspeed, it wouldn't suddenly cripple the idea of closed hardware.
 
I think the key point that a lot of people are missing here is the addition of backward and forward compatibility. This makes this idea much more sound than examples like peripherals (32X, Kinect, etc.) or releasing totally separate consoles at a faster cycle. This is much more akin to iOS or PC gaming in which your device will continue to be "good enough" to play new games for years after release.
You don't see anybody calling iOS users "fragmented", do you?
 
I think the key point that a lot of people are missing here is the addition of backward and forward compatibility. This makes this idea much more sound than examples like peripherals (32X, Kinect, etc.) or releasing totally separate consoles at a faster cycle. This is much more akin to iOS or PC gaming in which your device will continue to be "good enough" to play new games for years after release.
You don't see anybody calling iOS users "fragmented", do you?

Good post.
 
You aren't at a disadvantage because that other console runs it better. You are getting the exact same experience as van every one else in the multiplayer.

You are likely at a disadvantage because someone else has paid for a better TV or broadband service, perhaps they have a better quality router and network setup also.
 
This is what I was thinking may happen too. Of course it may be subsidized making it more palatable.



No, that's not what I'm talking about

The fact that using set hardware allows for optimization and such would no longer exist right? Or would it just become another PC graphics card arms race type situation?

I was referring to this. The optimization one can do on the consoles would not be worth it if you can just plop in a 50% faster GPU every 2 years. In addition to DX12 which narrowed the gap between PC / Consoles when it comes to accessing the hardware "directly'.
 
It makes sense given their current methods. They are basically taking the Steam Machine idea and doing it for Windows. Have the current Xbox One as the entry level, better SKUs for higher levels. They could run the same games with lower fidelity on the entry spec and up to 4k/60 on the high end spec.

This is exactly the way I see it. Say the game you have can be played regardless which console you have. X1, X1+, X1 elite...whatever it is. You just get higher quality graphics. Could totally see it.
 
microsoft wants to be apple so badly

You mean a company with a very healthy margin based on hardware sales combined with a closed ecosystem that locks users into upgrading thus perpetuating the cycle? You say that like it's a bad thing lol. Come on man, everyone wants to be Apple. If Sony could do it too they would and you know it.
 
I think the key point that a lot of people are missing here is the addition of backward and forward compatibility. This makes this idea much more sound than examples like peripherals (32X, Kinect, etc.) or releasing totally separate consoles at a faster cycle. This is much more akin to iOS or PC gaming in which your device will continue to be "good enough" to play new games for years after release.
You don't see anybody calling iOS users "fragmented", do you?

Yep.
 
Yes, but to play Halo 21, you need to upgrade, to play Halo 23, you need to upgrade, to play Halo 24... Halo 23 machine can handle Halo24 at reduced settings, but not Halo 21 machine.

Personally, I am fine with that. But I prefer PC.
Assuming that the Dev Time for a mainline Halo game should be about 3 years, I would fucking hope we need an upgrade consoles every 6 years.
 
Have fun playing multiplayer games with someone that has better fps and a higher resolution possibly.

There's already a platform for that. And it's called PC.
 
The problem with people claiming that it will be just as simple as it is now, and you can just upgrade as often as you feel like, and only upgrade every 5-6 years if you want to, and you don't have to mess with settings if you don't want to, is that no, of course it fucking won't be as simple as it is now. Microsoft might make an effort to make it simple, and they will sure as hell try to convince you it's simple, but it won't be anywhere near as simple. Sure, theoretically your box will be forwards-compatible for five years and will just work for you. But in practice, it's gonna look a hell of a lot more like this:


Hey, you want that game in that series you love, but guess what? The developer decided to make it only two generations backwards-compatible instead of three, because they didn't want to put in the effort to optimize it for your model. So you're shit out of luck. How about that other game? Oh, damn, its performance is good on other models, but shitty on your model. Shoot. At least you always remember to obsessively check Digital Foundry before every purchase, a thing you need to do now that performance and developer effort can vary wildly between models!

Well, how about this third game? You'd better look up its performance too. Looks good! No wait, shit. It only gets a stable framerate on the special edition of your model. You know, the one with the overclocked GPU, the one that came out 6 months later with that FIFA game bundled in. Yeah, that one.

Maybe you should look into upgrading your machine's hardware? Some of these machines can be upgraded; you know that. But you're just an average-Joe consumer, and you don't even really know what phrases like "CPU" and "RAM" mean. But you do the annoying research to figure it all out. But alas, the specific hardware upgrade you wanted isn't available for your model. No, wait; they used to have it, but it was discontinued last month. Now it's really expensive on eBay. Shit!

Perhaps you could tweak the settings. But you hate messing with settings. You don't want to game on a PC. That's why you bought a console. Microsoft promised it would just work. You sigh.

You're feeling a little frustrated when your programmer friend happens to call you up. He's been making an indie game and it's been going well. But shit, he's getting really nervous about optimizing and testing his game on a half a dozen different Xbox models. He's really thinking of just releasing the game on Playstation. Shoot, you were really looking forward to trying his game.

Maybe you should consider just buying a newer model? But they're so expensive now that Microsoft releases so many of them, each needing its own round of R&D and stress testing and everything else that goes into designing and manufacturing hardware. You miss the days where developers could afford to take a loss on hardware, since they only had to sink those hardware design costs every 6 years or so.

You think about it. And then it hits you. Just buy a fucking Playstation. Because there's only one of those on the market, and it actually does just work™.

Nail on head, spot on.
 
The problem with people claiming that it will be just as simple as it is now, and you can just upgrade as often as you feel like, and only upgrade every 5-6 years if you want to, and you don't have to mess with settings if you don't want to, is that no, of course it fucking won't be as simple as it is now. Microsoft might make an effort to make it simple, and they will sure as hell try to convince you it's simple, but it won't be anywhere near as simple. Sure, theoretically your box will be forwards-compatible for five years and will just work for you. But in practice, it's gonna look a hell of a lot more like this:


Hey, you want that game in that series you love, but guess what? The developer decided to make it only two generations backwards-compatible instead of three, because they didn't want to put in the effort to optimize it for your model. So you're shit out of luck. How about that other game? Oh, damn, its performance is good on other models, but shitty on your model. Shoot. At least you always remember to obsessively check Digital Foundry before every purchase, a thing you need to do now that performance and developer effort can vary wildly between models!

Well, how about this third game? You'd better look up its performance too. Looks good! No wait, shit. It only gets a stable framerate on the special edition of your model. You know, the one with the overclocked GPU, the one that came out 6 months later with that FIFA game bundled in. Yeah, that one.

Maybe you should look into upgrading your machine's hardware? Some of these machines can be upgraded; you know that. But you're just an average-Joe consumer, and you don't even really know what phrases like "CPU" and "RAM" mean. But you do the annoying research to figure it all out. But alas, the specific hardware upgrade you wanted isn't available for your model. No, wait; they used to have it, but it was discontinued last month. Now it's really expensive on eBay. Shit!

Perhaps you could tweak the settings. But you hate messing with settings. You don't want to game on a PC. That's why you bought a console. Microsoft promised it would just work. You sigh.

You're feeling a little frustrated when your programmer friend happens to call you up. He's been making an indie game and it's been going well. But shit, he's getting really nervous about optimizing and testing his game on a half a dozen different Xbox models. He's really thinking of just releasing the game on Playstation. Shoot, you were really looking forward to trying his game.

Maybe you should consider just buying a newer model? But they're so expensive now that Microsoft releases so many of them, each needing its own round of R&D and stress testing and everything else that goes into designing and manufacturing hardware. You miss the days where developers could afford to take a loss on hardware, since they only had to sink those hardware design costs every 6 years or so.

You think about it. And then it hits you. Just buy a fucking Playstation. Because there's only one of those on the market, and it actually does just work™.

i'd be very surprised if there were ever more than two or three xbox models supported at any given time.
 
There can still be closed hw advantages, you could give a ps4 double the ram, double the the transfer speed, double the clockspeed, it wouldn't suddenly cripple the idea of closed hardware.

True.
I guess in that sense only the newest Xbox or whatever would have said hardware advantages for a short period of time.

Kind of similar but different to regular console hw advantages as devs always need time with a game consoles to maximise them, which might be harder down the road with three iterations of an Xbox on the shelf maybe.
 
Top Bottom