Geometric-Crusher
"Nintendo games are like indies, and worth at most $19" 🤡
The Durango project is the development name of the console that became known as the Xbox One.
It's an interesting project and here I will analyze it from the pre-production stage until the end of 2016 (the Xbox One completely changes its path after this date) and for this I will use open sources.
The first point to address is architecture moving to x86-64 for Microsoft meant moving away from 3RL while for Sony it meant moving away from the complicated Cell processor. We all know that the PS4 is more powerful, however things would be different, Microsoft engineers are not stupid, they knew that Sony would use a GPU with more ALU (CU) and that this would be a bottleneck with the Jaguar architecture's Bobcat core, so they decided to use 8GB of RAM and surprise Sony (but they are the ones who are surprised ).
Another point to be addressed is the controversial goal of 200 million consoles to be sold. It may seem stupid, but I can see that they were somehow inspired by the PS2. It's not hard to see, Kinect 2.0 would be analogous to the DVD ROM drive in their minds. And the PS4 would be like a GameCube, cheap but without the DVD. In theory, the popularity of the Xbox would win over non-gaming consumers and expand the brand.
This point seems crazy to me and I also believe it was a fatal mistake, yes the Xbox One was never designed to be a cheap console, some analyses suggest that even without the Kinect the Xbox One costs more than a PS4 with 8GB GDDR5, so the hellish storm was made, less power and more expensive. However, when we put non-gamers into the equation, the average Joe doesn't know the dynamics of the gaming market so they could pay that price.
The strategy behind the first games is very smart, FM5, DR3, KI and some new IPs, by default the strategy is to make many initial games and only continue with the IPs that are best received by consumers. I honestly liked the 2013 and 2014 Xbox exclusives more than the PS4 ones.
Dead Rising 3, FM 5 with the drivatar system, Killer Instinct, Titanfall. Yes, Microsoft tried to please or seem attractive to Playstation consumers with games like Quantum Break, Ryse, Insomniac Sunset Overdrive (these guys have never made games for Xboxes before). FF15 E3 2013 was confirmed for the Xbox One, MGS5 was shown on the Xbox by Kojima, the exclusivity of Rise of the Tomb Raider. These things made the Xbox One the most Playstation-like console ever. Ironically this did not please the base, Many analysts say that listening to consumers is a good thing (especially in retrospect, when it works), but when listening fails, they say, "I told you so." In 2009, 2010, and 2011, the complaint was that Xbox had made too many Halo, Gears, and Forza games, but the people complaining were the ones who weren't going to buy an Xbox anyway. Microsoft listened, and the results were disastrous.
I sincerely believe that luck is as important as competence, Microsoft was competent, luck just wasn't there.
It's an interesting project and here I will analyze it from the pre-production stage until the end of 2016 (the Xbox One completely changes its path after this date) and for this I will use open sources.
The first point to address is architecture moving to x86-64 for Microsoft meant moving away from 3RL while for Sony it meant moving away from the complicated Cell processor. We all know that the PS4 is more powerful, however things would be different, Microsoft engineers are not stupid, they knew that Sony would use a GPU with more ALU (CU) and that this would be a bottleneck with the Jaguar architecture's Bobcat core, so they decided to use 8GB of RAM and surprise Sony (but they are the ones who are surprised ).
Another point to be addressed is the controversial goal of 200 million consoles to be sold. It may seem stupid, but I can see that they were somehow inspired by the PS2. It's not hard to see, Kinect 2.0 would be analogous to the DVD ROM drive in their minds. And the PS4 would be like a GameCube, cheap but without the DVD. In theory, the popularity of the Xbox would win over non-gaming consumers and expand the brand.
This point seems crazy to me and I also believe it was a fatal mistake, yes the Xbox One was never designed to be a cheap console, some analyses suggest that even without the Kinect the Xbox One costs more than a PS4 with 8GB GDDR5, so the hellish storm was made, less power and more expensive. However, when we put non-gamers into the equation, the average Joe doesn't know the dynamics of the gaming market so they could pay that price.
The strategy behind the first games is very smart, FM5, DR3, KI and some new IPs, by default the strategy is to make many initial games and only continue with the IPs that are best received by consumers. I honestly liked the 2013 and 2014 Xbox exclusives more than the PS4 ones.
Dead Rising 3, FM 5 with the drivatar system, Killer Instinct, Titanfall. Yes, Microsoft tried to please or seem attractive to Playstation consumers with games like Quantum Break, Ryse, Insomniac Sunset Overdrive (these guys have never made games for Xboxes before). FF15 E3 2013 was confirmed for the Xbox One, MGS5 was shown on the Xbox by Kojima, the exclusivity of Rise of the Tomb Raider. These things made the Xbox One the most Playstation-like console ever. Ironically this did not please the base, Many analysts say that listening to consumers is a good thing (especially in retrospect, when it works), but when listening fails, they say, "I told you so." In 2009, 2010, and 2011, the complaint was that Xbox had made too many Halo, Gears, and Forza games, but the people complaining were the ones who weren't going to buy an Xbox anyway. Microsoft listened, and the results were disastrous.
I sincerely believe that luck is as important as competence, Microsoft was competent, luck just wasn't there.
Last edited:
