Xbox 720 Reveal

[Bester]

I wasn't expecting anything worth my time from consoles, but it's still fun to mock them.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Bester

[alanschu]

 

 

 

Electronic Arts - Bull****ting everyone

Standard operating procedure, not just for them, but many publishers.

 

 

I'm surprised EA Sports actually  made a PC version of FIFA, since they haven't been making PC versions of most of their sports games for a long, long time.

 

I don't agree with their justification (poorer sales, but it was always on previous gen tech), but c'est la vie.

[AwesomeOcelot]

The PS4 and Xbox One couldn't touch a PC with a i5 and just one Titan but the architecture in them is a generation ahead, because these consoles are using PC hardware, that will be released around the same time, i.e. a generation ahead, on PCs that's around every 6 months, summer 2014 PCs will be a generation ahead. He switches to talking about the PS3 and the Xbox 360 when he talks about benchmarks.

 

It's not that surprising they're using the older engine on PC, football is much bigger than those other sports, it's a worldwide sport, other countries have more PC gamers. They want the game to play on as many PCs as possible, FIFA is one of those titles that people who don't play many games but like football will get. There's going to be a period where PC is going to get ****ty ports from the Xbox360 even though the PS4 and Xbox One are out, because they don't care about making good games and they'd rather people not play games on PC. The Xbox One and PS4 version of FIFA was developed and will be running on a PC with mid tier GPU, but they won't release it.

[kirottu]

*from the 7 gif*

 

Is it true that xbox system is going to use 3gb of its 8gb memory? Even windows(vista, 7 and only use 1gb.

[AwesomeOcelot]

*from the 7 gif*

 

Is it true that xbox system is going to use 3gb of its 8gb memory? Even windows(vista, 7 and only use 1gb.

Pretty much, at least it doesn't use half of its memory like the Wii U. I suspect the PS4 uses less considering they were planning on only having 4GB up until recently.

 

Do console gamers really complain about installing games on HDD? "Ahhhh they're going to make my games load multiple times faster, now I will have to pause to make coffee".

Edited May 23, 2013 by AwesomeOcelot

[Elerond]

3GB is too much only for the OSs, so if that is correct number I think that they allocate some memory constanly for apps and videos that run on windows kernel side. Which would make sense as they want that somewhat instant switching between those operating systems and running apps like skype or internet explorer at the same time with the games.

 

One's OS architehtute as far I know is following: bottom there is hyper-v and top of that runs two virtual machines which other has xbox game os and other windows kernel and some metro like gui. Xbox game os is the one which run games and sevices that they need and windows kernel side runs apps, videos, downloads etc. and services that those need. This gives them ability to switch between these two os very fast as they only need to change which virtual machine is shown in the monitor.

[Rostere]

 

The only reason smart TVs exist at all in the first place is because computers and consoles were far too slow to get the same functionality.

What are you talking about? That's not even remotely true.

 

It is. Why the heck would I want a "smart TV" if I can just buy a far cheaper "stupid TV" and link it to my normal PC? Or even my console. The only thing I would need then is an Internet connection and the subscription-based services of my choice. It's the future, I tell you.

 

If that functionality would have existed, nobody would have thought of releasing "smart TVs". People are so used to think about their cable TV, stationary phone, mobile phone, console, computer and internet connection as being somehow fundamentally disctinct services. "Durr, why would I want to call someone from my PC?" "Durr, why would I want to watch TV on my computer?" Obviously this is an artificial construction. In the future, all of these connections will be merged into one while the different services remain.

 

Why hasn't this thought occured to more people? Well, because you tend to associate for example the computer OS UI with all the "serious" stuff you do in front of a computer. If you could use basically the same UI/OS for all of these things, the articial separation of devices for these services become clearer.

 

 

 in the future, you will have one entertainment computer in your home which does all of the stuff.

Even if true then it won't be the On3 in most cases, as it is a completely voluntary purchase. It'll be either a 'proper' computer or a device you already have like a phone or tablet- or the TV you already own. Is much of anyone, seriously, going to pay hundreds of dollars to get the On3's TV centric features plus pay additional monthly costs over what the cable/ channel providers charge when most of those features come bundled into your TV? Unlikely, gaming has to be the big selling point and it's been positively downplayed, and apart from WiiU the On3 looks to be the worst option there by a fair distance. And even worse, for all the emphasis MS put on TV etc at the launch they're US only features. No doubt they'll come to other places eventually, but as a launch item the thing you've gone overboard in emphasising doesn't even apply to 70% of the world market. It's the height of insularity- it's just moronic.

 

MS: hey everyone! You should turn your computer into a smartphone! Everyone: If we wanted a smartphone we'd buy one! And it wouldn't be a Win8 one...

MS: hey guys! Now you can pay extra to do stuff you can already do, just on our new Xbox! It might also play games, maybe! Everyone: ...

 

It may be some sort of unifying strategy at work but its implementation is just baffling. If you want to use win8 across multiple systems and 'synergise' them then do so, but don't do a half arsed job, don't go off on tangents and don't throw out the stuff that is done well to tilt at the Android/ iPhone/ smartTV windmills.

 

 

I'm not trying to argue for the XBox One really, I'm just trying explain why some of the stuff people have been complaining about are actually sensible from Microsoft's perspective.

 

MS apps such as SmartGlass exist for Android as well, they're really evidently not trying to restrict the XBox/ smartphone cross-functionality. The real thing is about feeling at home in the device interface, and so on.

 

Like you say, there are a lot of things to argue against, such as some features being US-only, I'm not trying to defend the XBox One overall but rather explain some of Microsoft's strategies.

[Rostere]

 

Let's face it - in the future, you will have one entertainment computer in your home which does all of the stuff.

The future? It's my present. I don't need a big TV bulking up my living space. Is there ever anything on it? For TV-series? Internet. Movies? Bluray/DVD on my PC. Why would I need a TV and console?

 

Yes, those console-exclusive games suck (I look at you Heavy Rain or Red Dead Redemption), but they are seriously not worth over $1000 off additional tech one has to buy for them.

 

 

Exactly my point!

 

So, the question which remains is whether most people will choose a PC or some type of console...

[LadyCrimson]

My viewpoint is that I don't need a "smart" anything.

[AwesomeOcelot]

The computing power of a SmartTV is not equivalent to a HTPC from 8 years ago or Xbox360 or PS3, they use cheap low power ARM CPUs. It doesn't take the power of a midrange PC that's in the Xbox One or PS4 to do the things the Xbox One and SmartTVs are trying to do with media and television.

[alanschu]

The issue is more one of concurrency.

[Katphood]

Because the PC has an overall larger catalog of games?

That's the most important factor in my opinion. My current "midrange PC" could easily entertain me for the next 4 years. 

[Rostere]

The computing power of a SmartTV is not equivalent to a HTPC from 8 years ago or Xbox360 or PS3, they use cheap low power ARM CPUs. It doesn't take the power of a midrange PC that's in the Xbox One or PS4 to do the things the Xbox One and SmartTVs are trying to do with media and television.

 

Exactly, and that's why I think that people would rather have a normal screen + PC or console rather than pay for "smart" stuff in your TV that every other device you have can do better.

[AwesomeOcelot]

 

The computing power of a SmartTV is not equivalent to a HTPC from 8 years ago or Xbox360 or PS3, they use cheap low power ARM CPUs. It doesn't take the power of a midrange PC that's in the Xbox One or PS4 to do the things the Xbox One and SmartTVs are trying to do with media and television.

 

Exactly, and that's why I think that people would rather have a normal screen + PC or console rather than pay for "smart" stuff in your TV that every other device you have can do better.

 

The only reason smart TVs exist at all in the first place is because computers and consoles were far too slow to get the same functionality.

When have SmartTVs existed but computers and consoles have also been too slow to get the same functionality? The latest and faster SmartTVs coming out now are slower than the computers and consoles of 8 Years ago. SmartTVs exist because it doesn't cost much to add the processing power needed to a TV, not everyone will have a console or another box that's far more expensive than the additional cost of a manufacturing a SmartTV with ARM CPU compared to a non-SmartTV, and TV manufacturers need to compete with features, but also probably think the services are an opportunity to sell owners things and sell ads.

Edited May 23, 2013 by AwesomeOcelot

[Zoraptor]

3GB is too much only for the OSs,

It is Win8 (basically) plus the more pared down gaming OS. I could easily see it getting to 3GB since they've stuffed just about as many features into the on3 as baseline windows has- Kinect, IE, video handlers, internet handlers, network handlers, updaters, hardware drivers- and Win7+ really requires 4GB RAM on PC.  And it will have to dynamically handle RAM and other resource allocations across the two OS. It really isn't the pared down specialist gaming system that consoles used to be.

 

Surface would a good parallel- 32GB storage? More than half isn't available even immediately after purchase...

[Elerond]

 

3GB is too much only for the OSs,

It is Win8 (basically) plus the more pared down gaming OS. I could easily see it getting to 3GB since they've stuffed just about as many features into the on3 as baseline windows has- Kinect, IE, video handlers, internet handlers, network handlers, updaters, hardware drivers- and Win7+ really requires 4GB RAM on PC.  And it will have to dynamically handle RAM and other resource allocations across the two OS. It really isn't the pared down specialist gaming system that consoles used to be.

 

Surface would a good parallel- 32GB storage? More than half isn't available even immediately after purchase...

 

 

My Windows 8 runs under 1 GB of ram, if I close all foreground applications, meaning that antivirus, firewall, sgl servers, file search, email services,  etc. thing are still running that you don't have in Xbox One.  And for example Windows Phone 8 uses same kernel and runs on phones that have only 512 MB of ram without any problems.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Elerond

[AwesomeOcelot]

Windows 7 only uses about a gig, and IE is partially loaded, I wouldn't have thought any of those things would make up the 2 gig that's left. My guess would be that actual applications are always running or it's just reserved for them.

[Zoraptor]

There's a big difference between 'taking up' 1 GB and practical applications occurring with 1GB though. You'd never actually run a win7+ computer on 1GB RAM unless it was unavoidable; MS presumably wants quick response times, quick boot times, quick load times etc rather than a disk thrashing lag fest. I'd presume that a lot of stuff will be preloaded- and I'd presume that there would be some sort of compulsory firewall/ AV system in addition to the full time kinect, having IE without that is a recipe for absolute disaster. Imagine people streaming kinect feeds from hacked/ trojaned on3s, for example. Desktop win8 is also a better comparison, the on3 ain't ARM and has far more in common with PC architecturally than any cell phone.

 

Any dual OS set up is going to be complicated memory wise and require more than the base line memory- you might, for example, want to play a game (shock! horror!) while streaming something to watch later in the background. If the set up described by MS is accurate then that would require both OS to be loaded and managing competing resources at the same time, and people will not want their game skipping because the win8 portion wants to use the HD or whatever simultaneously to the gamer OS.

[Calax]

If that functionality would have existed, nobody would have thought of releasing "smart TVs". People are so used to think about their cable TV, stationary phone, mobile phone, console, computer and internet connection as being somehow fundamentally disctinct services. "Durr, why would I want to call someone from my PC?" "Durr, why would I want to watch TV on my computer?" Obviously this is an artificial construction. In the future, all of these connections will be merged into one while the different services remain.

 

Actually, this is more growing out of the technology not being ready. Even in the late 2000's it required more high end monitors and graphics cards to be able to hook into TV's.  And the Telephone is something you wanted to be able to easily move around the house, and until recently (well, comparatively recently) the Computer---> Phone has been kinda iffy.  VOIP has been around but only with Skype did it really become good enough to hold true phone calls over.

[Bokishi]

My win 7 install uses 2-3 gigs of ram at any given time.

 

I just don't get why they were hyping cable tv as a next gen feature, I'm guessing XBOX TWO will feature am/fm radio

[Nepenthe]

I already have VLC autopause when my phone rings, that's smart enough for me.

[Amentep]

 

*from the 7 gif*

 

Is it true that xbox system is going to use 3gb of its 8gb memory? Even windows(vista, 7 and only use 1gb.

Pretty much, at least it doesn't use half of its memory like the Wii U. I suspect the PS4 uses less considering they were planning on only having 4GB up until recently.

 

Do console gamers really complain about installing games on HDD? "Ahhhh they're going to make my games load multiple times faster, now I will have to pause to make coffee".

 

 

I never complain about installing games on the HDD; in fact its how I managed to avoid the RROD for many years as constantly running the disc drive increased the heat of the system (still ended up RRODing though on a hot summer day with bad circulation of air).

[Nordicus]

Consoledeals: Xbox One second hand game licenses are up to £35 each

 

MCV: Publishers to receive cut of Xbox One pre-owned sales at retail

 

You can consider used games market on Xbone effing dead

 

£35 = $52 = 40€ for a used game, and retail will get exactly 10% of that as profit. And that's not all, this is apparently not a flat price either, Microsoft will demand its share of any money that goes over that.

 

I'm honestly expecting some serious backlash from retailers at this point

Edited May 24, 2013 by Nordicus

[Monte Carlo]

M$ economics, where a used item is still worth 90% of its value. Pffft.

 

[alanschu]

I'm still curious if the digital reselling rumor is true or not (since it means used sales stick around, and are arguably more beneficial to the gamer, Microsoft, and the developers.

http://kotaku.com/you-will-be-able-to-trade-xbox-one-games-online-micros-509140825

 

As for taking a cut, I'm not sure why people are surprised.  The disc is just an installer, and much like Steam or something, in order to play it on a different account you will have to buy it.  As Microsoft is effectively just selling another copy of the game, the developer and Microsoft are both going to get a cut, same as if someone had just bought the game.  I wouldn't be surprised if they just treat it exactly the same as a digital sale.

 

 

Given that games must be installed, and do not require the disc, I'm not too surprised that something like this was implemented.  I suppose they could have gone with continuous CD checks and CD keys and the like, but there's no way some form of DRM wouldn't exist, lest one person buy a game and then split the cost with his 7 friends as they all install it on their own machines.