Jump to content
LCVG

Xbox Next Specs


adamsappel
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Who knows? Maybe it will have a harddrive. You'll just have to pay extra to get it. Honestly, I can't imagine an Xbox 2 without one. I can't even imagine the next Playstation without one. It's one of those things that I think many gamers will just expect with the next generation systems.

 

``Sony isn't as motivated to launch a new console because it is No. 1,'' he said. ``If Microsoft waits for them, it is in effect allowing Sony to design Microsoft's box.''

 

Something occurred to me when I read this. It seems as if Nintendo and Microsoft don't want to make their move until Sony does. Why? Well, does anyone remember what Sony did to the Dreamcast when it came out? Maybe it's not such a foolish move after all.

 

Just a thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only real new info in the article is the mention of there being "Three IBM-designed 64-bit microprocessors". Three?? Developers are going to love that. Then there's the assumption that those processors will be G5's.

 

If it doesn't come with a hard drive I bet their Live! kit includes one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be dumb to not have at least have an HD option. It would be equally stupid to not provide backwards compatibility. MS is not dumb though, so I think these will be included.

 

I'm pretty excited about how powerful this Xbox will be. Hopefully by the time it's released, I'll have replaced my 32" Wega with a nice HDTV :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by iCamp@Feb 2 2004, 07:40 AM

If it doesn't come with a hard drive I bet their Live! kit includes one.

That makes a lot of sense, Camp. MS probably realized that there was a revenue stream they missed out on. I mean, everyone who buys a PS2 or GCN HAS to buy a memory card, or no saves. But no one HAD to buy an xbox card.

 

So, by using the traditional memory card as the save game medium, they ensure additional revenue there.

 

Then, bundle Xbox LIVE with a Hard drive, and charge a lot more for it. Those who want to play online will have to pay for the HDD.

 

Carlos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Microsoft was thinking they lost revenue by including a hard drive. I think they just needed to include more for less, to play ball with Sony. Now that people know what they can do, they could easly have a hard drive as and add on option. It would piss a few people off, but hey, I'd by one. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that people know what they can do, they could easly have a hard drive as and add on option.

 

Except add-ons by & large do not sell. They fragment your marketplace, making it harder to get developers to develop for them. I know that as a consumer, I don't like them.

 

We're a bunch of XBL fanboys on here, but that shouldn't get in the way of noting that less than 1 in 10 XBox owners have the XBL kit, according to the last round of numbers I saw. Heck, I work with a bunch of tech savvy geeks & gamers, and most of the people here seem to have little interest in XBL - "I'm not paying $50 for it" etc.

 

Sony will be very lucky if 1 in 10 PS2 owners buy the HD kit.

 

And I think that TeamXbox report is junk BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if they've got no hard drive (or gobs of even more expensive NVRAM), they've definitely written off backwards compatibility.

 

Exactly. I think I've tried to stress that the two need to go hand-in-hand for the Xbox - games are written presuming they can temporarily store info on the hard drive partition, as well as having the longterm storage space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe all of the current hacks/cheats are accomplished by manipulating game saves on the hdd.

If all of your game save info was online, ms could easily scan and remove any unwanted data.

 

A central repository of data is becoming the norm, not the exception. If I had to guess I'd say they would force people not using live to buy a device to store their information, and all of that information would be completely ignored if live was activated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the Microsoft concerns being discussed in the article is that developers didn't write their games with the hard drive in mind. What's with those load times in KOTOR and Top Spin? I would have easily written off the TeamXbox post as mere Xbox fanboy site ramblings, but The San Jose Mercury News is a legitimate news source and this was not an opinion piece. As they state in their article, these specs come from Microsoft sources. Newspapers answer to lawyers so they tend to print facts, not speculation (and when they don't, it generally isn't something as inconsequential as videogame console specs they stick their neck out for). It strikes me that these are trial balloons MS is floating to see how gamers, investors and the competition react.

 

And what's so bad about it? No internal HDD? Guaranteed it's an add-on. I'd buy it, especially if it's bundled with Live as Camp wisely suggests, since it has the most application for online uses. It sounds like they're really trying to capture the High-Definition market, which we have to be happy about. I think the backwards-compatability issue can be defused if Microsoft unequivocally commits to supporting the Xbox with as much dedication as they've shown with Windows products (and Sony has shown for the PS1). Xbox Next can be marketed as the next big thing, while the Xbox is still a great choice. If they could make it so the two are "stackable" (sharing of data, peripherals, etc., not just physically), they can sell much more easily to current Xboxers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they could make it so the two are "stackable" (sharing of data, peripherals, etc), they can sell much more easily to current Xboxers.

 

That's what I need, two giant consoles stacked precariously on top of one and other. :lmfao:

 

Seriously though, it would suck to have to pay extra for something I've come to expect. But being the materialistic bastard that I am, I would.

 

Losing backwords compatability would not do well for MS in my opinion. I think the big N's determination to create a new way of doing things each time around isn't going so well this round. But that said, I'm not sure I ever even played a PS1 game on my PS2. My girlfriends kid did though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gameindustrybiz jumped in with a report on the new Xbox specs:

 

http://gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?...me=dev&aid=2897

 

The real surprise in this leaked information, however, is that rumours which circulated last week claiming that the Xbox 2 was not guaranteed to have a hard drive installed as standard are, in fact, completely true.

 

Although all aspects of the specification are subject to change at this early stage (bear in mind that at this point in the lifespan of the original Xbox, almost none of the specifications as announced made it into the final product unchanged), our source confirmed that developers have been told "not to bank on" having a hard drive as a standard component of the system.

 

Although a final decision on whether to cull the hard drive from the specification is thought to be still under discussion, Microsoft is known to be toying with the idea of supplying the hard drive as an add-on peripheral (not as part of an "Xbox 2 Live" kit, as some sites reported last week, since such a thing won't exist - the console will be sold fully online-enabled), while using extremely high capacity flash memory cards for data storage.

 

If the company does go ahead with a basic specification that doesn't include a hard drive, it's likely to be seen as a backwards step by developers and consumers alike - especially since it's widely assumed that the PlayStation 3 will include an internal hard drive, and may even incorporate digital video recording functionality similar to the recently released PSX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how confirmed are these specs? I remember making wild speculations last summer about this, but the consensus was that moving away from x86 is extremely unlikely...

 

Now it looks like they will. However, if it's true that they will be using 3 CPUs based on the G5, I think implementing backward compatibility in emulation won't be a problem. Ignoring for the moment the possible lack of a HD.

 

Maybe one more reason that MS bought VirtualPC...which can emulate X86 on the PowerPC architecture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The PS1 and PS2 processors are not the same technology. So having a different processor is not a stake in the heart of backwards compatibility.

 

As I have said previously, I don't care about backwards compatibility. I do however think that harddrive technology is very important for XBlive. I will go out on a limb and say that the Xbox 2 will definitely have a harddrive. It simply has to.

 

As for the three G5 processors. I cannot imagine that any specs are finalized for Xbox 2, and for this reason I think this is all a load of crapola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now, they'd be expensive, however, the G5 is a small processor. it's 118 square mm vs 217 for the P4 (not Prescott). I don't know the cost of the chips in bulk, but size is the number one determiner of cost (not the only one).

 

But, if MS is planning on using these for Xboxes in 1.5~2 years, the price should plummet.

 

It's smart to think in terms of SMP as well, because the 970 was designed from the ground up for multi-processing (it is, after all, the consumer version of the Power4 which is only sold as a multi-core CPU).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The PS1 and PS2 processors are not the same technology. So having a different processor is not a stake in the heart of backwards compatibility.

 

The PS2 gets its backwards compatibility by having a PS1 chip on the motherboard that acts as the processor in charge of controller input, memory cards etc. When you play a PS1 game, it's effectively running on that processor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the next Xbox will have a hard drive for one reason: losing the HD would be a bad idea, and MS has proven to generally have good ideas so far. The HD was marketed as an integral part of the Xbox, and it has lived up to the hype for the most part. Custom soundtracks, downloadable levels, and no need for memory cards were promised, and all have been delivered. It would be a bad idea to alienate the core Xbox 2 audience, ie: people who liked the first Xbox enough to buy one, by cutting out functionality that attracted that core audience in the first place. Also, PC ports are a very important part of the Xbox library, and I assume the next Xbox has the power to get close to the "max settings" holy grail. Axe the hard drive and games like Morrowind are out, or at least much harder to port. It would reflect badly on the next Xbox if the PS3 were getting awesome versions of games like say....Max Payne 5, whereas the Xbox versions were lackluster. If the next Xbox did not have a hard drive and the other systems did, it would be an easy choice for me. I've already been burned buying a MS system at launch and getting a Thompson drive, so I'd be much more inclined to wait for a price cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by FutureVoid@Feb 2 2004, 07:51 PM

Microsoft is known to be toying with the idea of supplying the hard drive as an add-on peripheral (not as part of an "Xbox 2 Live" kit, as some sites reported last week, since such a thing won't exist - the console will be sold fully online-enabled), while using extremely high capacity flash memory cards for data storage.

"the console will be sold fully online-enabled" - since this was pretty much the exact phrase used to advertise the then-upcoming first XBox, I don't believe a word of it.

 

There are good reasons for Microsoft having less than 10% of its users on Live, and its not just the standard "addons don't sell" problem. Of the XBox owners I know in the UK, only two others are actually on Live because only two others have ADSL. If you require a broadband connection for your box to work its practically dead in the water, for at least the next few years. Hell, half the time my machine isn't connected to the net, even though I have Live, simply because the TV is in a different room to the router.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the MS plan is to allow use of media on other HDDs in your house like the Xbox has started doing now. For example, by including a 80211.g wireless chip in the Xbox 2 and easy network connectivity, you can have your Xbox 2 network songs or videos from your PC in real time or in game. Therefore you don't need to have all your MP3s and stuff on your Xbox at all times, it only need be available somewhere on your home network that the console can see it. So no HDD needed next to the TV.

 

Patches and new content are stickier subjects, but I wonder how much of it we would really notice. Other than Splinter Cell and Mechassault, most of the online 'new' content seems like just unlockables already on the disc you bought. Why not just ship it with all that stuff enabled from day one? And I can't think of much patching that games have done other than MA once or twice.

 

I don't know, I love having the HDD in there and would consider it a loss to not be in the Xbox 2, but I guess we all have to wait for an announcement at E3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...