The Xbox One Thread - One X & One SXBOne

[Luminis]

Another thing. I know this may sound stupid to say and ask for but I hope that they allow for us to keep our accounts and other things like Avatar clothing and such.

Yeah, agreed. I mean, I'm not the kind of guy that has a bzillion gamerscore points, but I still wouldn't want to lose my XBL account. I wouldn't really see a reason why MS would alter XBL too much, anyways.

What I'd like to see from the Durango: Moar powar!

Aside from that, the ability to set my own pictures as wallpapers - that's the one point I miss dearly from my PS3 days. Backwards compatibility doesn't really concern me, though, and neither do multimedia features.

But it'd be nice if the Durango was able to support both XID and HID devices. Because, frankly, I'd hope that I would be able to play games like The Elder Scrolls Online on my Durango, but with a keyboard... Also, nobody would be shafted after buying a Logitech wheel.

 

[Raitziger]

New specs in x720 document look very impressive : http://www.gameinformer.com/cfs-fil...-SiteFiles/images-news-xbox720/xbox720doc.pdf

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Really, more rumored specs?

I am seriously going to create a company that makes up ridiculous specs for unreleased hardware. Throw up ads on YouTube, FaceBook, gaming sites... Have an ad company that does nothing but get hits on their site. Get paid off the ads on my site.

I can see it now..

"NEXT XBOX POWERED BY 18 CORE CPU?"

"PS4 RELEASING WITH 4 GRAPHICS CARDS?"

"WiiU2 LIQUID COOLING SYSTEM REQUIRED FOR MOST POWERFUL CONSOLE EVER?"


But, it seems cloud computing is Microsoft's method to achieve this "never have to upgrade again" business.

I personally don't see cloud computing taking off for the majority of the population for at least another decade. Connectivity is severely lacking in some parts of the States.

 

[Spagetti69]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-the-curious-case-of-the-durango-devkit-leak

 

[Bigbazz]

I know the arguement with consoles is that you don't have to upgrade, but if you buy a good enough PC it will survive the lifespan of a console too. Much of the issue is that new games come out and people want to run on high settings and high resolutions.

Most games these days on the console are running at 720p, and I can assure you that my old computer, that is roughly the same age as the Xbox 360 is just as capable at running those titles if the resolution is as low as 720p. A recent(ish) example is Skyrim, it wants high system specs but still runs on the consoles, but if you run the game at the same settings that you get with the console version that old PC will run it just fine too, resolution wise I can get away with higher too. Another example was Crysis 2, where my old PC was running considerably higher graphical quality at slightly better FPS than the consoles due to how well Crytek optimised the game for the PC.

For reference the specs were

CPU : Athlon FX60
GPU : Radeon HD3870
RAM : 2GB DDR400

I understand that the PC in question would have cost a lot more than the XBOX 360/PS3 in the first place, but the PC would also be far far superior graphically for a few years until developers have squeezed the absolute last bit out of the consoles with their games (which is what we have seen). Because of this I think the arguement that you have to upgrade the PC every 2 years is so far off the mark.

TL: DR - On topic bit

Having upgradeable platform type console that gives you the option of better graphics it could be good (like the N64), but if there are games developed that require the hardware upgrade to play at all, it would be less popular. I'm fairly certain the market point has to beat the PC on price to performance, which I'm fairly sure they could pull off.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Based off the leaked presentation Microsoft is going with cloud computing as a means to "upgrade" the hardware. It looks like there will actually be no hardware upgrades on the consumer side.

 

[MagpieRacer]

I would rather have it on the consumer side. Cloud gaming is not the way forward in my opinion.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

It will be when things like Gigabit Internet have hit the market.

6-8 years from now when we are looking at the replacement for the next XBOX, instead of buyIng a completely new console you will simply subscribe to a cloud based gaming network.

 

[Tornado]

6-8 years from now when we are looking at the replacement for the next XBOX, instead of buyIng a completely new console you will simply subscribe to a cloud based gaming network.

6-8 years from now I'm doubting people will be any more enamored with the idea of paying a subscription fee in addition to individual fees per title to play games.

 

[E28]

It will be when things like Gigabit Internet have hit the market.

6-8 years from now when we are looking at the replacement for the next XBOX, instead of buyIng a completely new console you will simply subscribe to a cloud based gaming network.

And what about the people who don't get brilliant internet, or are able to get a package with unlimited downloads, or etc etc...

I simply cant see it happening. There are places in the UK that don't get broadband, let alone gigabit internet.

 

[Carlos]

And what about the people who don't get brilliant internet, or are able to get a package with unlimited downloads, or etc etc...

I simply cant see it happening. There are places in the UK that don't get broadband, let alone gigabit internet.

That's like 1% of all people who have internet? I don't think Sony, Microsoft or any other company will change their plans for those few people. But there always will be some sort of console at your home to play it on, so I guess if something like this will ever happen, it probably has an option to play without internet connection.. (By going to a store to get a disc or whatever)

 

[Bigbazz]

Most of the people I know have an average (3-8mb) speed internet connection with limited download, if most of the people I know count for 1% I would be surprised. Also, do you think that the PC hardware industry is going to make it easy for companies to put them out of business.

If a service like OnLive becomes popular enough and works without latency, it could remove the need for you to upgrade your PC ever again, I'm not sure what to make of that.

 

[ch3ng]

It will be when things like Gigabit Internet have hit the market.

6-8 years from now when we are looking at the replacement for the next XBOX, instead of buyIng a completely new console you will simply subscribe to a cloud based gaming network.

I have a 100mbit and that means i'm Cloudgaming ready, but i will never support it, because it has very much disadvantage and only a few advantage. And you don't own the games or content anymore, because it is a loan service.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't the Onlive games only available for 2 years?

 

[BlisteredHand]

Even with some people who already have gigabit connections they can be limited to 50GB a capacity a month, which equates to about 8minutes a month of gigabit speed data then no internet access for all the remaining minutes of the month!

 

[Carlos]

And you don't own the games or content anymore, because it is a loan service.

Or like Steam, you can buy it but there is no option to sell. Personally I'd rather have it on disc..

 

[Akmuq]

The way to sell games is on discs AND on PSN/Live, but you need to have it on discs or else you're almost guaranteed to lose about half you're sales if not more. Cloud service is bad, and download only games (Euro 2012) are stupid, especially since a lot of gamers are children and don't have credit cards.

Power really isn't important. Sure, PS3 had more power then the Xbox, and while it was able to make sure games like GT5 had epic graphics, the multi-platform games took a big hit in graphics on a PS3 as they had to be ported(?)

I hope they're a good few years before release tbh, and I'm probably going to get the one that's better or that my friends have mostly, although round here it's an almost 50-50 split between PS3 and 360.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

6-8 years from now I'm doubting people will be any more enamored with the idea of paying a subscription fee in addition to individual fees per title to play games.

6-8 years ago no one thought DLC would be as popular as it is today. Now, companies obviously plan DLC prior to a title's release. Why? They can make as much money from DLC as they could the initial release.

Why would anyone pay for DLC? If you are on a PC title whose developers have chosen to give mod support (6-8 years ago it didn't really matter) you get much more content than a developer could ever release for absolutely free... Yet, DLC and subscription services (COD Elite and BF Premium) are raking in a ton of money.

But, I was using the subscription based concept as an example. That was in no way found in anything with Microsoft on it.

And what about the people who don't get brilliant internet, or are able to get a package with unlimited downloads, or etc etc...

I simply cant see it happening. There are places in the UK that don't get broadband, let alone gigabit internet.

Don't ask me ask Microsoft. I personally doubt they significantly consider the users who don't have access to broadband when they plan out their next 10 years with XBOX LIVE. But we're not talking about implementing gaming through the cloud right now; we're talking at end of life for the next XBOX. That's still quite a ways away.

I have a 100mbit and that means i'm Cloudgaming ready, but i will never support it, because it has very much disadvantage and only a few advantage. And you don't own the games or content anymore, because it is a loan service.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't the Onlive games only available for 2 years?

What advantages/disadvantages?

Again, nothing leaked from Microsoft stated it is a subscription service. It was an example I made. We know nothing other than what came from the in house entertainment roadmap which stated you never had to upgrade your hardware again due to cloud based computing services. Sorry if that created a massive amount of confusion lol.

 

[ch3ng]

Or like Steam, you can buy it but there is no option to sell. Personally I'd rather have it on disc..

Not true. There is a new law in europa and now you can sell digital games or content. This is not possible with cloudgaming. With Steam or other Digital distribution Onlineservice you have content on the HDD and you can use it everytime.

retail and digital distribution = you own the product
cloudgaming= loan service

What advantages/disadvantages?

Hundreds of disadvantage and only 4-5 advantage which are only a available with cloudgaming.

Cloudaming is already there and it is a loan service, but the companies want to fool the gamers and say you can buy the games.

What do you do if the company shuts the server down, because they don't have money or for other reasons. Do you can still use the games or content? No!!! So you don't own the products.

If MS and Sony don't have money anymore and shut their server down or delete content we still are able to use the retail games and content on HDD offline.

 

[Tornado]

What advantages/disadvantages?

Advantages:

• You don't have to upgrade your hardware as often (which means that advantage isn't even really there compared to consoles).
• Actually playing games when the problems aren't coming up will be completely stress free, since all of the troubleshooting is handled server-side.
• The games themselves will be cheaper than buying them (at least for brand new releases).

Disadvantages:

• Games won't look as good as if the rendering is done client-side.
• Latency in display and in controls.
• You don't own what you buy.
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to the reliability of the servers.
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to the reliability of your internet connection (meaning satellite internet is right out in many cases as an alternative to "traditional" broadband).
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to the bandwidth of your internet connection (your ability to play games is tied directly to whether you have a usage cap or not, among other things).
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to the financial reliability of the company you are paying.
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to your ability to pay to play them continuously.
• Your ability to play games is tied directly to the company keeping said games on their servers as time goes on.
• No form of consumers rights as we currently know them exist, because you aren't actually buying anything and it's basically a rental under a ToS that can be changed at any time for any reason by the service provider (and unlike the European ruling on digital content, that can't be changed by law because the service has no way of working without the company holding the ability to dictate terms).

Many of which have some sub-points that also apply and contribute to the problems with the concept. Some of these things might (and likely will) not be as much of an issue 10 years from now. Many of them very much will be, because they are inherent to the concept rather than a problem with the infrastructure (even the best of servers will occasionally need to go down to be worked on, for example).

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Not true. There is a new law in europa and now you can sell digital games or content. This is not possible with cloudgaming. With Steam or other Digital distribution Onlineservice you have the on your HDD and you can use it everytime.

retail and digital distribution = you own the product
cloudgaming= loan service

Hundreds of disadvantage and only 4-5 advantage which are only a available with cloudgaming.

Again, the only thing that was mentioned in the presentation was cloud computing / processing across a variety of platforms as a way for the consumer to avoid upgrading their hardware. This is not the same thing as a a cloud based all-you-can-play-recent-releases gaming subscription console such as On Live. No one said anything about Microsoft loaning you games lol.

Hundreds? Lol. Really? Only 4-5?

@Tornado

I agree with your points.

I personally prefer my own hardware. I like pretty technology lol.

I don't see cloud processing for game rendering taking off effectively for several, several years; Microsoft knows what they're doing though so if they think it will work it probably will. Obviously, they will have another console; but, for the consumers who don't want to upgrade their hardware they don't have to. Which is most likely the most probable approach.


But then again, what do I know? I don't work for Microsoft and didn't expect Gigabit to hit the US for several years lol.

 

[ch3ng]

one said anything about Microsoft loaning you games lol.

You just don't understand what Cloudgaming is.

[*]You don't own what you buy.

[...]
Many of which have some sub-points that also apply and contribute to the problems with the concept. Some of these things might (and likely will) not be as much of an issue 10 years from now. Many of them very much will be, because they are inherent to the concept rather than a problem with the infrastructure (even the best of servers will occasionally need to go down to be worked on, for example).

👍

Good post. That were only a few disadvantage.

 

[bevo]

6-8 years from now I'm doubting people will be any more enamored with the idea of paying a subscription fee in addition to individual fees per title to play games.

That's exactly what xbox live is now and they seem to be doing alright

 

[Samus]

That's exactly what xbox live is now and they seem to be doing alright

Online, yes, but it's not mandatory to play games at all. With Cloud Gaming you would need to pay the fee and be online to play ANY game, 'offline' or online.

 

[ch3ng]

That's exactly what xbox live is now and they seem to be doing alright

No it isn't People should stop comparing cloudgaming with Xbox Live Gold suscription or digital distribution on steam, PSN and XBL for example.

It is not the same. Cloudgaming is the worst thing in the gaming industry.

 

[Samus]

Since some people don't seem to be clear on Cloud Gaming it works like this:

You buy a console, it's power is relatively low and price very cheap. It doesn't do much.
To play any game you must connect to an online service and 'buy' it.
Once you've paid for the game it is streamed from a central server to your console for you to play it. You don't download it like a Steam game, you stream it. Your console is not being used to power the game at all and it's not placed on your console hard drive except for cache files and such. It's all being streamed from the cloud.

Therefore to be able to play a game at any time you must be connected to the internet with a high speed connection. If you have no connection or your connection is very poor, you have no gaming.

That is the reality of cloud ONLY gaming. Of course a mixture of the two would be slightly different.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

You just don't understand what Cloudgaming is.

👍

Good post. That were only a few disadvantage.

Or maybe you just didn't read the presentation where, again, it said nothing about loaning anyone games. You came up with that yourself. The only thing mentioned was cloud processing allowing users to access "their (personal) library" of movies, music, tv, and games across a variety of platforms (PC, console, tablet, smartphone). It also said nothing about cloud processing being the only option to users. You're mistaken if you believe there will be no console to replace the next XBOX/PS. You're highly mistaken if you think a cloud based "loan service" is the only feasible business model for cloud processing. But, if you knew something about this whole thing you probably wouldn't have given me the "hundreds of disadvantages 4 or 5 advantages" crap.

Sony is doing this exact same thing. How will the "free PSN" fare when Sony introduces cloud gaming and slowly phases in titles that require a console upgrade or cloud processing?

Holy crap, what's that PC? There are multiple graphics settings for games so people with much different hardware can still play them? Amazing.

Cloud gaming is not the worst thing in the gaming industry. It allows users to play a huge library of games, try them for free even, at a graphics fidelity higher than what the general population of console gamers experience, and all while thwarting the piracy of games. Sony, Microsoft, Crytek, On Live, Ouya, Nvidia, Gaikai and many more all have shown interest, at the least, in the potential of cloud gaming. But, I guess they don't know what they're doing and they're all wrong? Let's be realistic.

Personally, I think we should all just go back to playing board games and horse shoes. That way we have something tangible to grasp and will never have to upgrade.

 

[ch3ng]

Or maybe you just didn't read the presentation where, again, it said nothing about loaning anyone games. .

I talked about cloudgaming in general. Of course you don't need to use it. MS didn't say something about loan service. So does other companies about free2play which cost money.

The companies want to do cloudgaming, because it is a loan service and the customer don't own the products.

Yes your right the companies know what they do, but is this good for us gamer? I doubt it.

I have 5 questions for you.

How do you call a product you don't own because the company has the product and can delete it whenever they want ?

How do you call a product you lose after the company shut the server down or close the company?

How do you call a product you don't have at home on a HDD or somewhere else?

How do you call a product you don't own?

I call it loan or something similar to it. And

Do you realise that
company interesst =/= customer interesst?

 

[Robin]

The companies want to do cloudgaming, because it is a loan service and the customer don't own the products.

That's why I will never do the cloud, you don't own squat plus it costs them pretty much nothing to distribute. Only physical games for me. I hope the next gen consoles don't go totally down this route.

 

[Spagetti69]

Don't see people who subscribe to Netflix etc moan about not owning the product.

If a reasonable monthly Sub (£6) appeared for access to all games id be in probably.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I talked about cloudgaming in general. Of course you don't need to use it. MS didn't say something about loan service. So does other companies about free2play which cost money.

The companies want to do cloudgaming, because it is a loan service and the customer don't own the products.

Yes your right the companies know what they do, but is this good for us gamer? I doubt it.

I have 5 questions for you.

How do you call a product you don't own because the company has the product and can delete it whenever they want ?

How do you call a product you lose after the company shut the server down or close the company?

How do you call a product you don't have at home on a HDD or somewhere else?

How do you call a product you don't own?

*Snip*

1-800-"You're highly mistaken if you think a cloud based 'loan service' is the only feasible business model for cloud processing?"

F2P costs money? That's a new concept. Does the rest of the gaming industry know this? Hopefully, I am just misunderstanding you?

Lol. Companies want to do cloud gaming because they don't want consumers to own any of their software? There is no secret society within the gaming industry out to destroy the gamers that fund them (excluding EA/sarcasm). They don't get together late at night in dark alleyways and contemplate techniques to piss off gamers and take away their accessibility to software.

Honestly, the fear of cloud gaming is similar to the outcries over digital distribution several years ago. Everyone was whining about how it would be the downfall of gaming, gamers are losing rights, companies will own us, and blah blah blah. Meanwhile, I am laughing enjoying the Steam summer sales getting AAA titles for 75% off.

Don't see people who subscribe to Netflix etc moan about not owning the product.

If a reasonable monthly Sub (£6) appeared for access to all games id be in probably.

👍