Allard on HDD

[Mefisutoferesu]

I dunno, this all sounds stupid. If devs can't make full use of the HDD, then there's really no point... yeah, sure you can put music and videos on it and watch it from there, but frankly if you got a bunch of digital media you probably already have a PC. Why not just have some sort of interconnection? In fact they already DO offer that. Then there's always you're MP3 player or whatever too. The only real necessity I see with a HDD on the 360 is for downloads off of live! The way I see it the HDD's usefulness is directly dependant on the success of live! If people don't take to it, then it's going to get no use... well, the hardcore will figure something out... most likely illegal.

Yes, we could sit here an argue about portability or not crashing with the HDD missing or a number of things, but everything has a MUCH easier solution. There's no real need to kill functionality like they are. What could they possibly gain by this?? Anyone have a clue?

 

[Titanio]

sounds to me like the hardrive will be standard . They just don't want you to count on the drive being there .


You can have your drive out for repairs . You can have gone to a friends house and forgot to hook it back up or to bring it home .

They simply don't want you to have a disabled system because they had a removeable hardrive

"Look at the success the iPod has had by having different offerings. That is something we have looked at, sort of on the long-term horizon. We want to go get everybody out there that likes to play, and make them an Xbox customer. how do we do that? I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all approach over the next five year horizon."

"Actually, the very first one we sell is goin to have a hard drive. It doesn't mean that the hard drive is always going to be attached."

This makes it sound like it may not be there for commercial reasons - that devs shouldn't count on it because it may not be there in every unit in the future because it didn't come with it. I think it's clear that's the situation they're mostly considering when they tell devs not to depend on it.

Even in your situation where the drive is temporarily unavailable, Allard says you still need to be able to play your games.

 

[blakjedi]

But if MS is selling the HDD for use with 360.. then its ... FOR GAMES!

This should be really simple and its not.

 

[nelg]

J Allard and MS are kind foolish to be talking like this. Either make it standard or not. Tell devs its going to be in or not. Let the DEV decide whether or not they'll use it or not. Tell the consumer "you best to have that damn HDD in there or no gaming for you." The analogy of someone taking their hard drive over to their friends house is quite stupid too...

Looking to the future MS may want to license the Xbox 360 to others to include in Televisions or other things. If so they must want to insure that it is possible to run games with as little extra hardware as possible.

 

[jvd]

This makes it sound like it may not be there for commercial reasons - that devs shouldn't count on it because it may not be there in every unit in the future because it didn't come with it. I think it's clear that's the situation they're mostly considering when they tell devs not to depend on it.

The only diffrences between ipods is the size of the drive.

It seems to me that 20 gig will be standard for now .

IN the future they will offer more expensive units with bigger drives and drop the price of the system with the 20 gig drive .

THe reason why they shouldn't program for the hardrive being there is becasue its removeable and thus shit happens

 

[Titanio]

But if MS is selling the HDD for use with 360.. then its ... FOR GAMES!

This is what irks me. It seems more like an offset to initial costs and a driver for microtransactions and downloadables now, more than something that can be core to the games. If the games don't require it, I'm not sure why I should be forced to pick it up.

Not that a I think a HDD has an awful lot of use at the core of a game - i.e. i can think of few enough that would actually require one next gen, particularly after the lack of such use with HDDs last gen. But it seems mightily confusing when on the one hand people (and it has to be said, not MS) are holding it up as an "edge" for games on X360, and rumours about specific titles like Oblivion etc., while on the other MS is saying that games can't require it (in the same way that they could for example on Xbox).

 

[Confidence-Man]

But if MS is selling the HDD for use with 360.. then its ... FOR GAMES!

This should be really simple and its not.

The only reason it's being included now is for backward compatibility.

Later on, when BC isn't a big marketing issue anymore they will remove it from the standard model.

 

[BlueTsunami]

The only reason it's being included now is for backward compatibility.

Later on, when BC isn't a big marketing issue anymore they will remove it from the standard model.

Thats what it seems like, Allard pointed out that Devs shouldn't be relying on the HDD. Not only because its detachable..but because they probably will eventually sell a no HDD version. What I find weird is Oblivion going to really really need the HDD?

 

[blakjedi]

OK so honestly what is the purpose of the HDD?


On PC's load and search times are minimized using the HDD improving teh seamless ness of the game experience.

On PC's you also get he benefit of virtual mem which can never be as fast as RAM but wayyyyy faster than a 12x DVD or 2 X bluray drive...

I mean geez its almost like MS fans have to do all their thinking for them (not unlike with Sega).

 

[Hardknock]

It's funny, I speculated this a while back, but noone seemed to believe me. Here's the post:

I don't know guys, I've been thinking something for the longest... Remember early on when Xenon's specs were first released and the HDD as standard was undecided?? What I'm thinking, is the first few shipments, or maybe the first few million will come with the HDD standard(sort of like the first 1 million PSPs coming with Spiderman UMD). What this does is 1, it takes care of the hardcore(early adopters) who are more likely to get XBL and will have a need for a HDD. And 2, it also gives developers a known install base from the get go of people with HDDs, so that they can create content for it with no worries. And 3, once the PS3 hits, or after a certain amount of time, I think MS will lower the price of the 360 and take out the HDD(to help cushion the price drop.)

So if you want your HDD to be packed in, I would suggest trying to pick up a launch unit. I could be wrong, but when you think about it, it would be good business sense.

 

[rusty]

is it not possible to have the game cache data for quicker load times IF an HDD is present, then just have the longer load times when it's not?

 

[Carl B]

Hardknock don't pat yourself on the back too hard there - I've been saying this same thing for months.

And when everyone was eating up that analyst nonsense recently of two launch versions, one with a hard drive, and one with a bigger hard drive? No no no - it's always been about giving themselves a means of cutting costs drastically later on in the 360's life, while at the same time creating an install base such that the hard drive is considered essentially a part of the system, likely boosting sales in it's eventual add-on form.

PS - One system at launch!

 

[scooby_dooby]

It's as simple as this, Xbox Live depends on a HDD. MD's entire strategy depends on XBOX Live. How can anyone think they'll "cut" the HD?

What happens to gamer_girl and boombox_guy if there no HD? How will they reach the entire household if you can't DL content and little mini-games etc!? No, not gonna happen.

I have no clue why they are doing this whole "games shouldn't depend on the HDD" thing it's plain stupid. The idea of removing your HDD and going to a friends house is just silly. Who cares about gamers like that? The percentage of those gamers is very small and besides, gamers like that can buy memory cards like they have always done! The rest of us want faster loading times, a wider variety of games, and 100% developer support for the HDD.

Then there's the BC thing.

The only logical thing I can think of as to why they've made this without HDD statement is that they fear the reliability of these 20gig drives, and they don't want the system failing when the HDD fails. It was one of the main reasons xbox1's would fail, but I'm unsure how the reliability of these 2.5" drives compares.

Somehow...I just don't see a HDD-less 360, i think they're just blowing smoke up our ass. Maybe to keep sony guessing?

 

[BlueTsunami]

Did the Xbox use full sized HDD's? or did they use the small form 2.5"? All I know is that 2.5" HDD's are known to fail because of heat issues (where I work, the most common reason for laptop failures is due to harddrives overheating). If they made a switch to 2.5" HDD in the 360, I can understand why they would not want the system fully dependent on the HDD..simply because if it where to break..Microsoft would have to replace it...I sure wouldn't want to pay for another HDD when it wasn't my fault it failed.

 

[Carl B]

@Scooby: Well, I don't think so though - it really would be a great way to eventually cut costs, and I hold that once the notion of a hard drive has worked intself into the psyche of the people, they won't have a problem buying it as an add-on. At the very least, MS wants this to be an option they could pursue in the future, even if they never end up acting on it. There is just no other logical reason why they would ask devs to *not* assume a hard drive as being present. No other reason is 'big' enough to give away that development advantage.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Blue - xbox1 used a stock HDD off the shelf. yes..they made the modders life very easy! no more....

xbdestroya - i can think of a few reasons other than the intention of cutting it down the road. mainly reliability issues.

how does your theory work knowing that xbox live requires a HD, and that MS's entire strategy is about connecting everyone and broadening the gaming audience? The entire center of this strategy is the abillity to download and save different stuff to the console.

What can I say, I just don't see it....not until LATE LATE into the lifecycle, like 2009ish maybe...so far MS has done a great job of listening to gamers and doing what they say they'll do, so time will tell.

 

[Carl B]

xbdestroya - i can think of a few reasons other than the intention of cutting it down the road. mainly reliability issues.

how does your theory work knowing that xbox live requires a HD, and that MS's entire strategy is about connecting everyone and broadening the gaming audience? The entire center of this strategy is the abillity to download and save different stuff to the console.

What can I say, I just don't see it....not until LATE LATE into the lifecycle, like 2009ish maybe...but time will tell

Well, I guess we both have different takes on it, but true - no way of really knowing until we're into the thing. I agree that 'Live' is an essential part of MS' strategy, but another aspect of it seems to be peripheral madness, with the faceplates (the margins on those must be incredible), third-party licensing fees for controllers and such, etc etc. I think the hard drive might join that list, but the desire for Live in every console might indeed trump it, who knows?

Whatever the case, MS has given themselves some flexibility by not requiring the hard drive for the consoles core functionality.

On a tangent, the location and position of the drive compartment seems ideal for heat/cooling issues.

 

[Confidence-Man]

how does your theory work knowing that xbox live requires a HD, and that MS's entire strategy is about connecting everyone and broadening the gaming audience? The entire center of this strategy is the abillity to download and save different stuff to the console.

Live doesn't require the HDD. A memory card can be used to store account information, and things like music can just be streamed or played off an ipod or whatever.

Downloadable content, sure, but realistically that's not going to be a big attraction to the mainstream consumer. Also, with microtransactions it's possible that a memory card will suffice for just downloading smaller stuff like individual cars for PGR3 or outfits for characters in DOA. The HDD is for the big stuff like full-blown expansions, map packs, and whatnot.

Really, the only reason to include a HDD at launch is so they can say "Our machine is backward compatible".

 

[rusty]

Live doesn't require the HDD. A memory card can be used to store account information, and things like music can just be streamed or played off an ipod or whatever.

which reminds me

i hope they make it very easy for you to take your live "identity" with you - i'd like to be able to play as my own tag when around at a friends house rather than being "MrX.#2".

hardly a big deal, but one of those nice little touches

 

[scooby_dooby]

"Live doesn't require the HDD. A memory card can be used to store account information, and things like music can just be streamed or played off an ipod or whatever."

No, too complicated, expensive, and not user friendly enough.

To attract part-time gamers it must be easy and affordable. Content must be downloaded onto the machine without the need for extra peripherals, or shuffling through memory cards.

I don't see how you can believe that argument, just because Live CAN operate without a HDD< doesn't mean it can do so in a meaningful and effective way. Live depends on a HDD to be effective for anything more than multiplayer. And MS depends on Live to broaden their gaming demographic, which is, by the way, their publically stated goal for this generation.

p.s. if the HDD was solely for BC, then a 1GB HD would have done just fine. No need for 20. There goes that argument.