A Possible Solution to the Hard Drive Problem?

[pharmer100]

Hi insane dork- thanks for the reply - I think we actually agree on a lot more than we disagree on!


I think the only major thing we disagree on is the price issue. I really believe that for all intents and purposes those people who buy the full package are in reality only paying around $50 dollars for the HDD anyway. (whether you factor in the cost of producing the extra stuff included in the package or the potential loss of future revenue for the free stuff). Therefore, I don't believe it would have any negative impact on Microsoft’s costs at all. (Apart from the loss of sale from the poor sods who brought the core system and need to upgrade of course.)

Also, the problem with the wait and see approach it once the 2 separate packages have been launched – tha’ts it - you really can't make the HDD standard after that.

 

[Mr_Puffy]

That's my opinion as well, actually.

Thanks for the validation. *gets ticket stamped*

If X360 games come out and they lack from the HDD issue, by all means, don't buy one. I'll be right there with you. I just think it best to wait and see what effect this has instead of swearing it off this early. That's all.

No, what you were trying to say is that my opinion wasn’t valid because you want to meet chicks at a convent.

Anyway I will wait it out as appose to buying it at launch like I was going to do before the lovely announcement. I have this sneaking suspicion that casual gamers (aka the majority) will drive the â€￾coreâ€￾ to become standard because of its lower price (I hope i'm wrong). If that happens all bets are off on which console I’ll get.

 

[Sandwich]

Well then the problem is that the memory card is overpriced, which is true.

If MS is going to require you to buy an accessory for the thing, the least they can do is offer options. Better still, they can offer reasonably priced options. They screwed the second step, but this plan would screw the first step.

I think the 40$ MC is a fair argument for having to buy just one hardrive.
MC may not be mandatory, but you have to be a real masochist not to play with atleast one MC, preferably 2.

Let's say the harddrive is 67$ for 20GB, that should make M$ a fair profit. I'd definitely prefer that to 1 40$ MCs of maybe 512MB at best.

Their marketing departments should be able to sell Xbox360s with a HD and promise you'll never have to buy a MC.
For an extra 27 bucks you'd get all the advantages of a harddrive. MS should make the drive standard and let marketing do the math for the stupid consumers.

 

[Guden Oden]

Wow, who are you god? My reasons for picking a console are just as valid as your reasons and its elitist of you to think otherwise.

Wow, you're getting all defensive without me even having addressed you specifically. We're not having self esteem issues here or something, I hope?

Jokes aside though... Seriously, what game exists on xbox that cannot be done on another console that lacks a harddrive? To be frank, I can't think of a single one straight off the bat. Now we extend this to the next generation, x360 will have considerably larger memory cards as default than previously (64MB I believe, vs. 8 for first gen). PS3 will have multiple flashcard slots. Downloads, level editing etc will in other words be possible. Even more possible if x360 supports standard USB storage media, I might add.

So when it's all said and done, it's the games, and having fun playing them that really counts, right? Not which particular bits and bobs are included inside the plastic case of the console itself.

And in conclusion, just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it is just as valid as another opinion. Everybody has opinions, some of them are flawed, some plain faulty. Others outright nutty. Nothing regarding opinions says they per definition all have to be valid you know.

 

[pharmer100]

game that can't be done on any other system - Halo. See my post a few back for reasons.

 

[function]

game that can't be done on any other system - Halo. See my post a few back for reasons.

I hardly think that dumping the whole level onto a HDD (then loading from there rather than off the optical drive) is what defines Halo as a game.

Guden is making some extremely good points.

Multiplatform games, which will make up the bulk of all games sold next gen, can't be based around using a HDD becuase PS3 won't have one as standard. Even on Xbox, where it could be used as standard, it had little impact on exclusives - reducing loading times was pretty much it.

 

[pharmer100]

hi Guden - I agree - dumping levels on to the HDD is not what made it great. Although I personally feel the degree of real world illusion that it allowed did make Halo extra special. Mind you I guess it was only noticable because of all the backtracking through the same levels!

And I do agree, in the end the HDD thing may not be a big deal ...but a lot of people seem to be upset by the decision and I still think with the solution I presented everybody wins. Surely that can't be a bad thing?

 

[function]

Also, the problem with the wait and see approach it once the 2 separate packages have been launched – tha’ts it - you really can't make the HDD standard after that.

But even if MS had only released a HDD bundle, the HDD was NEVER going to be standard. MS learned their lesson with Xbox 1.

The Xbox 360 is going to be retailing for $99 at some point - MS would have to be nuts to lock themselves into paying $30 for a HDD part at that time (rather than making money on selling it separately). The memory card (and now HDD) business must be worth big money!

 

[pharmer100]

Function - I totally agree that MS cant included it as an intergral part of the system (see my first post) - its just not economically viable.

I was suggesting instead to release it as a seperate unit and state that "core system" buyers have to buy it if want to be able to save games/access live .

Only difference to the situation now is consumers would have to pay (for example) $50 dollars for harddrive instead of $40 dollars for a memory card and developers can assume its a standard part of the system and develop games to take advantage of it.

Everybody wins.

 

[function]

I was suggesting instead to release it as a seperate unit and state that "core system" buyers have to buy it if want to be able to save games/access live .

Only difference to the situation now is consumers would have to pay (for example) $50 dollars for harddrive instead of $40 dollars for a memory card and developers can assume its a standard part of the system and develop games to take advantage of it.

Everybody wins.

I can see where you're coming from, but the moment that a HDD bascially become compulsory you push up the basic cost of ownership and (importantly IMO) take away the impression that there's a choice in the matter. You also have to limit your margins on the HDD peripheral in order to make it as affordable as possible, and miss out a chance to make a killing of mem card and HDD sales ...

 

[Sandwich]

But even if MS had only released a HDD bundle, the HDD was NEVER going to be standard. MS learned their lesson with Xbox 1.

The Xbox 360 is going to be retailing for $99 at some point - MS would have to be nuts to lock themselves into paying $30 for a HDD part at that time (rather than making money on selling it separately). The memory card (and now HDD) business must be worth big money!

That's just psychological isn't it? I mean, buying a console for 99 and then buy the HDD for 60 seperately, you might aswell have one package for $159.
Sell it seperately and the HDD will never be more than a big MC. Comes standard developers can use it and you'll get more value for money.

 

[function]

That's just psychological isn't it? I mean, buying a console for 99 and then buy the HDD for 60 seperately, you might aswell have one package for $159.
Sell it seperately and the HDD will never be more than a big MC.

You don't need the HDD though. For many people, for the vast majority of games, you'd notice little to no difference over buying a cheap third party memory card. Lower initial cost of ownership than HDD, easier to slip in your pocket, and you can always buy another.

The Xbox HDD was barely more than a large memory card and disk cache, which is exactly what the HDD on Xbox 360 will be (with perhaps less emphasis on using it as a disk cache).

Comes standard developers can use it and you'll get more value for money.

But far fewer people will buy the console at $160 as opposed to $100, negating the point of MS investing billions in the thing, and of developers spending millions making games that are highly optimised to make use of the HDD ...

I agree with you on the value point btw. No way I'm getting an Xbox 360 without a HDD.

 

[Titanio]

I think PS3's solution to no standard HDD should be for Sony to keep pushing down the prices of memory sticks, and to mandate a minimum size for use in PS3 for games.

It's less than 6 months since I picked up a 512MB stick for the PSP for 60 euro. 1GB sticks are now available for that kind of money. 512MB is now maybe €40. Sony has acknowledged that they need to bring the memory stick prices down, and they have been, but if they continue to do so, 512MB or even (very maybe) 1GB could look reasonable for a standard memory card from a pricing perspective next Spring. That kind of storage would be enough for most games that could REQUIRE a HDD. I think most MMORPGs could run ok off that amount of storage?

I don't know how things like caching etc. might work off a mem stick if at all..not sure what the transfer rate is like. But storage could be plentiful and cheap on PS3 even with mem sticks (even more so if SD cards/Compact Flash can also work with games, but I'm gonna be conservative and guess that Sony will only allow their mem sticks and the HDD to be used for that). So whilst a HDD would obviously be better, devs could still assume every PS3 had a decent amount of minimum storage, and perhaps even eventually, if they get cheap enough, to bundle dedicated sticks with games ala the mem card that was bundled with Animal Crossing, if really needed. Asides from just games that require more storage, from an online POV it could also help attract more downloadable content etc. I think it should and will be reasonable to expect the vast majority of PS3 users to have a certain minimum X amount of portable storage, and I think it'd be interesting if Sony makes it "official" by saying "you need a mem stick with X amount of storage to use with PS3 games".

Speaking of which, how big will downloads be with the next gen systems? They seem to want to push them from everything from maybe a t-shirt in a tony hawk game to cars in racing games to (what i'm guessing is the biggest), full maps in first person shooters and the like. I remember Mechassault map downloads being about 10-25MB, but I guess that's not a great guide, since next-gen maps will require more space. But even say if maps were starting at 75MB (with other things like cars etc. much less presumably), at least a 512MB or certainly a 1GB stick would make such downloads feasible - thus devs could assume their market is "everyone".

 

[Inane_Dork]

I think the 40$ MC is a fair argument for having to buy just one hardrive.

Oh I agree. But I think the MC is dramatically overpriced (like, 2x too much at least). Most people seem to be taking the MC price as constant and varying the HDD cost. But to me, the MC price is severely inflated, so I don't think it's the best thing to take it as constant. It should be $20, tops. $12 or $15 would be nicer. Once that's the case, the argument kind of falls apart.

No, what you were trying to say is that my opinion wasn’t valid because you want to meet chicks at a convent.

owned.

I think the only major thing we disagree on is the price issue.

Sounds accurate to me.

Also, the problem with the wait and see approach it once the 2 separate packages have been launched – tha’ts it - you really can't make the HDD standard after that.

Indeed. But MS has been planning a non-standard HDD for quite some time, so it may not have been an option this time around.

 

[pharmer100]

insane -

| agree the MC cards are drastically overpriced as well, but people seems to be willing to pay that sort of price for them and if Microsoft goes ahead with the plan as its stands(as I am sure they will) then core users will have to play $40 dollars any way. But yes if the pricing of them changes you would still have the problem of people going for the cheap MC option. Even if its still a really bad option.

Re:- the non - standard HDD option plan you mentioned (sorry I don't know how to post extracts!) - I have been pondering that myself. The info they have been giving to developers and old interviews about the HDD being portable certainly seems to indicate it was the plan all along - which makes the Allard (?) statements regarding the "HDD as standard" and "launching with one SKU" even more strange. I'm am really unclear if this whole "core package" was the idea all along or a last minute change they have been trying to spin.

 

[Mr_Puffy]

Wow, you're getting all defensive without me even having addressed you specifically. We're not having self esteem issues here or something, I hope?

Jokes aside though... Seriously, what game exists on xbox that cannot be done on another console that lacks a harddrive?

I won’t pick an Xbox game because 1) 3rd party developers for the most part were not willing to make a game that was totally dependent on the Xbox (or the ps2 w/hdd in this case) because it would alienate a massive user base (ps2 users w/o hdd). 2) I could say Xbox first party and exclusives but I couldn’t prove it, for lack of comparison. So to answer your question I’ll say the Final Fantasy (on the ps2) that had to be bundled with a hard drive which I mentioned earlier.

So when it's all said and done, it's the games, and having fun playing them that really counts, right?

I already addressed that.

And in conclusion, just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it is just as valid as another opinion.

My statements on validity and opinions were not meant in general, they're case dependent; go figure.

 

[Mr_Puffy]

Jokes aside though... Seriously, what game exists on xbox that cannot be done on another console that lacks a harddrive?

why Xbox?

Resident Evil Outbreak and Gran Turismo 4's combined support will do little else but supply hard drive owners with an appreciated bonus, where Final Fantasy XI positively needs the HDD in every respect. It even ships with the thing with no availability outside of the bundle. So if Sony and other developers are to continue down a similar path in the coming seasons, FFXI has to succeed with blockbuster-like numbers.

from: http://ps2.ign.com/articles/500/500717p1.html

 

[pc999]

Jokes aside though... Seriously, what game exists on xbox that cannot be done on another console that lacks a harddrive? To be frank, I can't think of a single one straight off the bat.

Halo 1/2, rallisport challenge 2 (they said that in a interview to CVG, to lazi the serch now), D3 ( I think it uses to load textures), I think that most first/second party (i.e. exclusives) games uses HDD heavelly, but cant confirm it.

 

[Sis]

Given all the angst about the "non-standard" HDD, I'm wondering about the PC market. Given some of the comments, I would expect to see a ton of unique games making explicit use of the hard drive that comes standard with every PC.

But off the top of my head, I can't think of one. Instead, they're used for, basically, caching and game saves. And while caching is important, I see examples on both consoles where the load times are horrendous (Jade Empire, Fable) and great (Halo, God of War).

I like the hard drive because it gives me a ton of room for downloadable content and game saves. I have seen no proof that it actually impacts gameplay.

Does anyone know what Final Fantasy XI requires the hard drive? What's special about an MMO game that requires a hard drive?

.Sis

 

[Sis]

Halo 1/2, rallisport challenge 2 (they said that in a interview to CVG, to lazi the serch now), D3 ( I think it uses to load textures), I think that most first/second party (i.e. exclusives) games uses HDD heavelly, but cant confirm it.

None of the games you listed require a hard drive to play. They make use of it to decrease load times. So would you be happy if the devs came out and said, "You know, the 12x DVD plus the extra RAM really negates the need for caching to the hard drive."?

Also, I COMPLETELY disagree with your sig. I find it offensively bordering on outright FUD.

.Sis