05-01-2009 #1Takavach Guest
Why a New XBox Console is Coming Sooner Than Later
I predict the new Xbox, whatever it may be called, will be announced before years end and furthermore will be available sometime (probably second-half) in 2010. Here is why...
Phooey To Those Who Say It's To Early For A New Release
Being so dominant in the computer world for so long now, Microsoft already has deep-seeded roots in a culture where people are willing to spend anywhere from $150 to $450 on a new graphics card, just one singular component of a PC.
As such, I am thinking the way they see it, why would people not be willing to upgrade to an entirely new console for around the same amount of money? The 360 is after-all already going to be four years old this November, and lets not forget, the first Xbox launched in November of 2001. Yep, that just four years prior to the 360's launch.
Still, plenty of people would definitely be upset by the news of a new console for a plethora of different reasons. Number one being that for whatever reason, people see consoles as being immune to the plague that affects all other technology: once something is released it is already dated.
I believe Microsoft knows this is the mindset, and the main reason I believe they are going to be able to pull off the release of a new console in the mind of many consumers "so soon" is because for the first time...
New Games Will Have Scalable Graphics (at least for awhile).
Anyone who has played a game on the PC knows that most games have, for awhile now, included an Auto-Detect option that will detect your system's components and change the graphic settings for the game accordingly.
Admittedly, the Auto-Detect settings are almost always never right, but when you only have two systems you need to detect for, it makes a developers job that much easier. By doing this, they will not be abandoning the 360 and people will indeed still be able to play new game releases.
Only difference being is this time around they will be providing consumers with an option (and believe you me their marketing people will make sure to reiterate that "options" fact over and over) to play new game releases either on the new console with better graphics and resolution, or on their current 360 with the same graphics they have come to know and love. Again, this is yet another concept with roots in the already established PC gaming market, just replace one singular component with an entire console.
Taking this approach, after a few years Microsoft could kindly "suggest" to developers that for Triple-A titles to drop development for the 360 completely. This would be the exact opposite of how they handled things with the Xbox to Xbox 360 transition where they virtually dropped development almost instantly. Doing so would keep plenty of nay-sayers happy for at least a good time to come.
But What About Blu-ray?
Naturally, the concept of better graphics then leads to the question "Will Microsoft then decide to support Blu-ray?" Well my first response would be perhaps. I do not see that as being completely out of the question.
Perhaps even some sort of external solution would be an option as other companies seem to see that as a plausible and viable option. However, a more plausible scenario is that the resources needed to support higher resolutions, etc., especially when there are only two configurations to support (360 and new console), will actually still be able to fit on current dual-layer DVD's.
The two different configuration would already share so many common resources, and it is indeed only the graphical elements such as textures, etc., that would need to have two "versions."
Let's just say for the sake of argument that they could not fit everything on a current dual-layer DVD. With the now introduced option to install to hard-drive (again from PC world), especially on a 250-320 GB drive which is the most common-sense size to be in the next generation of consoles. Would it then really be that big of a deal if a game did indeed require two disks if you only needed one disk to play after you were able to install the game itself?
Finally, there is still the possibility that games can indeed be delivered by means of digital downloads, although I personally just do not see a huge company such as Microsoft strictly relying on a method of distribution that still has a long way to go before it is the absolute standard.
PC Graphics Are Just That Much Better
We all know the above subtitle in bold has always been the case, it goes without saying if you know anything about gaming. However, since we are talking about better graphics and resolution, one cannot deny or dismiss the fact that PC graphics are really, really starting to make the 360 (and PS3 for that matter) show how weak and not-so-capable they actually are in this department.
Truth be told, a capable PC could have shown both consoles graphical inferiority on Day One of each consoles release. Going back a few years to their release, the not all that informed public was simply just mesmerized by the fact that their newfangled HD TV was able to play games in HD itself.
Keeping in mind that for better or for worse, the modern day gamer is obsessed with graphics, I cannot help but think Microsoft is not only aware of this fact, but they also simply want to stay competitive in this area. Case in point, two games that are fairly recent releases that stick out to me as examples of superior graphics are F.E.A.R. 2 and Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena.
Both undeniably look dramatically better on a well equipped computer, and to reiterate, I believe Microsoft are smart enough to know people are either already realizing this fact and / or will start realizing it more and more as time goes on.
Also lets face it, the current generation of consoles was and still will be about the "HD gaming experience." One cannot ignore that none of the Triple A titles are running at the superior 1080p, and none probably ever will on this current generation (and note I do say Triple-A titles, yes there are indeed some games that are 1080p native, most notably XBLA and PSN releases.
So for a "true HD gaming experience," they need better more capable GPU's. Plain and simple. I can notice the difference in a 720p Blu-ray compared to a 1080p one, and I am sure I am not the only one. If game graphics can be at 1080p, and in a perfect world even run at a constant 60 frames per second, I am sure plenty of people would definitely be interested in and in-fact desire this capability.
They Want To Put The Nail In Sony's Coffin
Sony has time and time again talked about the PS3's ten year life-cycle. While it is a noble crusade, and one that many support at least in theory for their wallets, unfortunately it is just not a realistic one, mainly for the reasons I pointed out above about no games actually being capable of full-blown 1080p HD.
Sure, perhaps Sony can help developers squeeze some more power out of the Cell processor. Sure, graphics on the PS3, just as the 360, do currently look pretty damn good, but why not make them look even better if possible? Also lets face it, the PS3, just as the 360 in all fairness, are definitely limited in the GPU department to pull true HD off, as already outlined above.
While I have no doubt Sony is already working on their next console as well, I just do not think they are as far along as Microsoft is on their next console - not even close actually as they had a fairly well documented struggle getting the PS3 off the ground itself. I just cannot help but think that Microsoft sees this as a perfect opportunity to deliver a potential KO punch and put Sony down for the count, perhaps even for good.
The Experience Itself
We have to keep in mind that Microsoft already have done a major overhaul to the 360's OS itself with the launch of NXE. They are going to continue building and improving on NXE naturally, but they just as NXE's current name implies, Microsoft are indeed all about the new experience. As such, I believe that NXE will indeed be the last major overhaul to the 360, but Microsoft is and definitely will be itching to release a completely new experience sooner than later: Specifically one that capitalizes on social media and networking.
Expect plenty of partnerships to be announced and an even more social experience than you currently can and do indeed enjoy on the 360. Going back to possibly putting Sony down for the count, I do not think that anyone can argue that Sony is almost embarrassingly behind in this aspect with the PS3 currently, and if Microsoft can release and even stronger social experience, that could indeed have the potential to even further the distance between themselves and Sony as the must-have console.
Thing is, I do not deny that Microsoft can and definitely will continue to develop for the NXE, as they have an extremely solid foundation to build upon. However, taking into account the way social media and networking has and will more than likely continue to take over aspects of our everyday computing lives, I think something else to tie it all together is in the works.
If you then also add in the fact that the line between your computer and TV keeps getting blurred more and more, I believe it all adds up to multiple top-tier development teams somewhere deep in top secret labs in Redmond are buried knee deep with the task of designing a brand new experience that somehow ties it all together. Which then leads to...
Marketing. Marketing. Marketing.
This is perhaps the weakest reason for my prediction, but it actually has the potential to be the strongest if you also believe that companies live and die by their marketing departments. In keeping with this theory, it is my belief that 2010 just has a great ring to it. Simply put, 2011 does not.
To further elaborate, I believe Microsoft might even break the tradition of a November release and go for an October release. Yep, that would be 10/10/2010. I can literally see the higher-ups in any marketing department gathered in a non-descript conference room giggling uncontrollably at the potential to launch on this date.
To summarize, I believe Microsoft recognizes that they have a unique opportunity to potentially overthrow Sony permanently and secure their dominance in the console market. I also happen to believe they are willing to take the potential risks and steps necessary to seize the moment and try to indeed do just that, also making the RROD of consoles past a distant memory.
Will they announce it as soon as E3? Highly unlikely. Truth is who knows when they will announce it, but I do think for the reasons mentioned above, it will be much sooner than anyone might have expected.
More PlayStation 3 News...
05-01-2009 #2otarumx Guest
I just love this posts, gives me so much to work with ^_^.
Ok, here we go.
Why a New XBox Console is NOT Coming Sooner Than Later
A new Xbox announced at this time would really piss off people that already invested over 300 dollars in their consoles not counting the cost of the games, it would effectively give the finger to the "loyal" customers that expected to get a top of the line system and prove that the PS3 is indeed the next generation.
Here is why...
If MS where to try and replicate the PC business they would kill the market at least on their side, look at PC Gaming now, it is suffering exactly because most people are not willing to pay $150 to $450 for just a graphics card, if MS would seriously think about taking such a move then maybe they should just stick to PCs, why invest in a console that would be almost undistinguishable from them?
Traditionaly console cycles last 5 years, the 360 is coming up on it's 4th in November but this generation has been too slow to deliver and as such most games can be improved quite a bit before this generation becomes obsolete, we are just starting to see incredible looking games on PS3 that if what MS has always claimed is indeed true would also be possible on the 360 so, this generation still has some life left.
It would be horrible to be at the beginning of a "new" generation of consoles with the same crappy first generation games that inevitably appear and then two years for the real gems to come out not counting the obvious losses that MS would have to absorb to place this new console (Unless they go the Wii way and release a 360 with waggle)
Believing that gaming is all about graphics is a sure way to destroy the industry, the PC market has seen it. There was a pint in the cycle of PC Gaming where every new game would force the owners to upgrade their graphics cards, their RAM, even their processors. That would ammount to spending anything from 50 to 400 dollars just to be able to play the games that we wanted. The beauty about consoles is the standarization, if I buy a console now I will always be able to play games for that console without having to buy new components every six months (with the exception of microphones and lightguns or things of the sort)
Most people would really hate a PC configuration where the console they buy today can't play Halo 4 for example because they don't have this brand new graphics card with PhysX and 3D capabilities. Imagine that if you want to play the game you have to shell $120 or more instead of the usual $60 because this game requires this new card.
Sure the game may not "need" this cards and expansions but you would end up playing a subpar game with slowdown and bad graphics like it is with PC gaming now.
Consoles have remained far away from PCs because most people don't really comprehend the way PCs work, they just want to take their console out of the box, hook it up and play without worrying about the resolutions or settings, they want to go to a videogame store and get a disk and just play.
The hardcore would probably understand this "console" but I bet they would rather have a PC, after all they can do much more than gaming on it.
The concept of upgrading a console has already been done quite a few times with disastrous results, Sega did it with their Genesis/Sega CD and we all know how that ended.
Sure, I'm not agains giving the consumer choices, but it's not the same offering a console without an HDD or Wireless that may not be indispensable to enjoy a game fully than a console that feels gimped because most games look like crap unless I buy that $150 dollar graphics card.
I believe that whoever wrote this article is so in love with PC Gaming that truly wants MS to transform it's next console into a PC. I mean just read all the descriptions:
-A scalable console where the consomer could buy upgrades. (PC does this)
-A storage solution like an HDD for the games (PC again)
- Maybe Digital Dowloads (you mean like Steam?)
Ms would have to be really desperate or quite dumb to release such a console, mainly because in the economic times we are living in a new console would imply a loss on each unit sold ranging from $100 to $400 dollars per console.
It would destroy their 360 fanbase, why spend more money in "obsolete" technology when the new one will come out soon.
The licensing for such console would be a nightmare, imagine just how much money and investment would be necesary to provide all those little upgrades in graphic cards, memory and such. MS will not manufacture them, they have already proven that hardware is not their thing so, companies like ATI, Nvidia, Kingston, etc would have to provide this components.
And I just can't help stress this out over and over, the description of this "console" is exactly a PC, I just can't see it any other way. It is plain an simple a PC and I figure why buy a console like this when I can continue to upgrade my PC and get all the benefits without risking a shoddy made console that might brake like the 360 did.
05-01-2009 #3Nairb Guest
The technology just isn't here yet for a new console..
05-01-2009 #4saviour07 Guest
I love these posts too
here we go...
All seriousness, this would b a major fail for MS! "we cant develop our own high def media, so we'll use our competitors"
they would have to licence the tech from sony who would then make money per every console MS sold.
multi plat games just arent as graphically stunning as exclusives (which fear2 and dark athena arent... there multi plat!)
i refer you to http://www.ps4news.com/forums/playst...tml#post260962
read up before posting something like that please...
MS have lead the way with socially interacting players with LIVE and cross game chat etc.
but looking forwards to partnerships with social network experiences isn't something that will be an original idea when the new xbox arrives...
me thinks so
not gonna argue whether sony are behind, because truth be told i have no idea what the figures are to date, but i do know that sony aren't as "embarrassingly" behind as you would like to think since i have read recently that ps3 surpased wii sales in japan, which i dont think anyone can argue against, has been the leader in the "console war" since its arrival...
sorry to sound like im flaming, but to base a consoles arrival/announcement on the idea that you believe one date sounds better than another is pretty weak (which you did admit to be fair)
why not release it on 1st of july? (1/7/2010)
i can almost hear them big guys at MS marketing giggling myself
even the most avid ps3 fanboy cant deny that the 360 has dug its heels in and secured a large fanbase with a certain level of dominance in the market (and im a ps3 owner!)
this makes it sound as though 360 owners/MS are becoming desperate or believe there time is up and the ps3 is taking over...
anyway, thats my rant over
let the responses begin
05-01-2009 #5CyanCaze Guest
A nail in Sony's coffin? Why is it that because Sony had 1 --*>1<*-- Console generation where they were in last place in terms of sales they think Sony is going to call it quits. The PS3 has sold more then the Gamecube and almost the original Xbox already and they are starting to pick up sales, A PS3 price drop will put a nail in the coffin for Microsoft and would be a great deal for such a piece of technology.
The PS3 hasn't even taken off in terms of graphics yet. And as for that $450 Graphics card thing there are only maybe 1000 people in the world who have enough extra cash to buy one of those, and maybe 20000 that are interested in keeping their PC constantly updated. To me I bought a PS3 because it still hasn't had it's full potential tapped yet. Remember MGS2? Compare that to some of the later games like MGS3 and Jak3.
Blu-ray will never be used by Microsoft. Why would Sony want to allow them to create HD games? Since Sony owns 75% of Blu-ray I don't think we will be seeing Master Chief on blu-ray anytime soon.
In addition it seems like these articles are just written to make Fanboys mad. Since the Root of fanboyisum is Buyers remorse. What could seem more remorseful then your console dying after 2-3 years. I will also tell you why PC gaming will never be main stream.
(1) Nintendo????: Nintendo doesn't care about graphics anymore, and seems just set on selling a console that would take the average computer geek $50 to make, at the ripe price of $250.... Nintendo will never make games for the PC if their console fails they have a Portable. For some reason Nintendo portables are very popular even though they are over priced by $40-$50. Honestly if Sony bailed out of the console race as did Microsoft I would but a nintendo system before a gaming PC.
(2) Gaming PC's replicate the videogame crash of 1983: Yes it seems quite odd that the most powerful systems on the planet could be compared to a crash that happened from the bare minimum of power even back in their day. But PC's just have WAYYYY too many options. Like I said very few people want to upgrade their PC every 2 months, and for what you get it doesn't seem worth it. A PC gets maybe 1 exclusive game a year, depending on who made it decides if that graphics are better. So ytou are paying $4000+ a year on a gaming pc that only gets maybe 1 better looking game a year or every 2 years. At the moment Crysis was the last "Great" Graphics exclusive game for the PC, That wasn't already beaten by the PS3 with MGS4 and Killzone 2. Sure Fallout 3 Oblivion and so on look better on PC. But is it really worth it when games like MGS4 make it look horrible?
(3) Graphics junkies aren't qas common as you might think: I know everyone thinks that graphics ruined the gaming culture and so on, But truth is just about a month ago I explained graphics with a mathematical equation.
Graphics are = to Gameplay in 90% of all cases, but depending on the person they can be more then or less then given that the individual actually cares about it.
Anyway what this means is that people who see break out on the Atari with it's graphics will flood to the NES version of break out because of it's graphics. Same game play better graphics, a few people will still play the Atari version, but those are your retro gamers who are speculated to be blind. This is also why people enjoy their PS3's more then their 360's if they bought them at the same time (Normally the one they buy first is their favorite because they have a stockpile of games). The PS3 has better graphics and gameplay, at least in my opinion on the gameplay.
Anyway I just don't think PC's are going to take over games like people think. It's completely absurd in my opinion.
05-05-2009 #6vinizuh Guest
fan boy at its finest -_-
thanks for this. it was fun to read. lol