Allard on HDD

[Korrupt]

I have Xbox Live. I've downloaded content for several games, ripped a few of my favourite albums for playback in game and never been forced to clear a save file from the device in the whole time I've had it. I wouldn't be suprised to find I've got less than a Gig of stuff saved on the box - and next generation I won't even need to have my soundtracks on the actual console (that'll be a *choice*). I'll opt for a HDD, whether it's a pack in or peripheral, but many, many users (probably most) would never see a real benefit over using memory cards.

Next-gen is a bit different. Downloadable content will be much more pervasive, lots more movies, music, vg downlods available. Also there's downloadable demos (which is a killer feature BTW). I believe that I will get much more use out of the HDD next-gen than current gen, MS should just keep it standard with the hardware. Its a nice bullet point against the PS3 IMO.

 

[robofunk]

I think the whole point is that after launch people may want to buy a larger harddrive right off the bat. If MS starts to offer high definition PVR functionality through a USB adaptor then people will want a 250GB or higher HDD. If they're buying an Xbox for the first time then they won't want to pay for the included 20GB HDD on top of all that. They'll probably offer many different HDD sizes for PVR functionality so bundling them wouldn't make as much senses as selling a barebones Xbox360 and selling the HDDs + PVR seperately.

With such big HDDs I think they should give the option of playing entire games strait from the HDD using the DVD only for authentication. Even with a 20GB HDDs there is no reason this shouldn't be an option.

 

[Carl B]

I think the whole point is that after launch people may want to buy a larger harddrive right off the bat. If MS starts to offer high definition PVR functionality through a USB adaptor then people will want a 250GB or higher HDD. If they're buying an Xbox for the first time then they won't want to pay for the included 20GB HDD on top of all that. They'll probably offer many different HDD sizes for PVR functionality so bundling them wouldn't make as much senses as selling a barebones Xbox360 and selling the HDDs + PVR seperately.

With such big HDDs I think they should give the option of playing entire games strait from the HDD using the DVD only for authentication. Even with a 20GB HDDs there is no reason this shouldn't be an option.

There's no 250 GB hard drives being sold to begin with, though - maybe later on. We're talking 2.5" drives here remember, not 3.5". Microsoft is going to be able to get prices better than these, but here are some Arbitrary Newegg Consumer prices to ponder when thinking about what size drives will be offered for the 360.

 

[function]

Next-gen is a bit different. Downloadable content will be much more pervasive, lots more movies, music, vg downlods available. Also there's downloadable demos (which is a killer feature BTW). I believe that I will get much more use out of the HDD next-gen than current gen, MS should just keep it standard with the hardware. Its a nice bullet point against the PS3 IMO.

But only for people who take Xbox 360 online, and then not even all of those. Many, many people will use next gen consoles like they used a PS2 this generation. And while it is a nice bullet point against the PS3, making the console $30 (or whatever) cheaper at retail, and hitting those $150 and $100 sweetspots while losing as little as possible (or maybe even making a profit) are more important.

just look at all the stuff that gets cropped from console despite consting only a fraction of what a HDD does. PS2 lost it's HDD port (never mind an actual HDD) and a firewire connection (messing up some linkup compatability), and Sega even went so far as to cut unnecessary LEDs out of the Saturn during one redesign!

 

[function]

With such big HDDs I think they should give the option of playing entire games strait from the HDD using the DVD only for authentication. Even with a 20GB HDDs there is no reason this shouldn't be an option.

I'm hoping develpers will be able to put more work into streaming data and hiding load times next gen, with the consoles having such slow drives in comparison to the relative huge amounts of memory (for a console, at any rate). This would reduce the need for HDD "installation", but I agree, it would be a nice feature if security isn't too big a concern.

 

[Korrupt]

But only for people who take Xbox 360 online, and then not even all of those. Many, many people will use next gen consoles like they used a PS2 this generation. And while it is a nice bullet point against the PS3, making the console $30 (or whatever) cheaper at retail, and hitting those $150 and $100 sweetspots while losing as little as possible (or maybe even making a profit) are more important.

just look at all the stuff that gets cropped from console despite consting only a fraction of what a HDD does. PS2 lost it's HDD port (never mind an actual HDD) and a firewire connection (messing up some linkup compatability), and Sega even went so far as to cut unnecessary LEDs out of the Saturn during one redesign!

Agreed. Hey, as long as I get a launch console with a HDD at $300, I'm happy

It maes sense going forward to offer a cheaper alternative sans HDD for the casual gamer crowd that will get next to no use out of it.

 

[NavNucST3]

There's no 250 GB hard drives being sold to begin with, though - maybe later on. We're talking 2.5" drives here remember, not 3.5". Microsoft is going to be able to get prices better than these, but here are some Arbitrary Newegg Consumer prices to ponder when thinking about what size drives will be offered for the 360.

I think there will be an external USB device that uses 3.5" drives, I think this was one of the reasons MSFT is going with the royalty-authentication based system, is so that they will release the PVR as opposed to some third party dev. Remember a 16" usb cable isn't expensive at all, thus allowing one to place the external box in a myriad of places...there is nothing outside of the royalty-authentication scheme that says one won't be able to use a 3.5"; its just that the 2.5" fits.

 

[Tap In]

ya, i think he's looking more to 2008-2009 when the x360 makes it's drop to $99, then they may just cut out the HD.

I think his statements are pretty clear, HDD for now, "very conventional" then they'll listen to gamers. Well, gamers will never want to get rid of the HDD, so I don't see tha thappening.

I agree and let's not miss out on the quote about the potential for a system with a Blu Ray or Hd-DVD drive.

I really don't care what they do to the system in the future (1-2 years after launch).

I'm buying my launch system for games and WITH the HDD. that's all that matters to me.

 

[Korrupt]

I agree and let's not miss out on the quote about the potential for a system with a Blu Ray or Hd-DVD drive.

I really don't care what they do to the system in the future (1-2 years after launch).

I'm buying my launch system for games and WITH the HDD. that's all that matters to me.

Yep. For the early adoptors, throwing in the HDD is a very welcome gesture.

Down the line it might be cut, but I doubt that MS will at one point ONLY offer a non-HDD system, there will probably be alternatives (like the iPod analogy that Allard used).

 

[Carl B]

I think there will be an external USB device that uses 3.5" drives, I think this was one of the reasons MSFT is going with the royalty-authentication based system, is so that they will release the PVR as opposed to some third party dev. Remember a 16" usb cable isn't expensive at all, thus allowing one to place the external box in a myriad of places...there is nothing outside of the royalty-authentication scheme that says one won't be able to use a 3.5"; its just that the 2.5" fits.

I've heard of Sony possibly going the usb-PVR route, but not Microsoft. But then again I don't follow Microsoft news as closely. Certainly anything anyone does to put 3.5" drives into play greatly increases the available size options to the consumer (or the manufacturers, as it were).

 

[NavNucST3]

I've heard of Sony possibly going the usb-PVR route, but not Microsoft. But then again I don't follow Microsoft news as closely. Certainly anything anyone does to put 3.5" drives into play greatly increases the available size options to the consumer (or the manufacturers, as it were).

Its tricky because they don't want to kill off the Media Center PCs, but with Vistas rollout who knows. I don't think it will be something they roll out in the next year or so, but going 3.5" could also be considered a cost cutting measure for them, how much would a 250-400GB HDD be in two years, this gives a benefit of them saving money AND the consumer gets a serious increase in storage space(positive PR).

 

[Carl B]

Its tricky because they don't want to kill off the Media Center PCs, but with Vistas rollout who knows. I don't think it will be something they roll out in the next year or so, but going 3.5" could also be considered a cost cutting measure for them, how much would a 250-400GB HDD be in two years, this gives a benefit of them saving money AND the consumer gets a serious increase in storage space(positive PR).

I agree, a couple of years out ~320 gigs shouldn't be too hard a target (on 3.5" drives), especially with perpendicular storage coming on.

 

[chachi]

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.

That's probably right, launching with the hard drive is a way to ensure that it's seen as standard equipment. Later on they can drop it from the system and most people will still buy it. Bad, right? Not necessarily, if the price of the X360 was initially $299 and they dropped it to $229 with the 20GB drive for $70 then it's essentially the same, and if you wanted a larger drive, say they had a 40GB drive for $90, then this would actually be better. The key is to create the mindset that it's a HD system so the user base isn't split all that much, there will be a few systems that don't have one but most will. Developers can code for one being there, no problems.

 

[scooby_dooby]

The other thing is, if they price these HD's ~$50 whos not going to buy one?

The alternative would be a memory card that's maybe $10 less, but 1/20th of the storag space.

 

[randycat99]

Congratulations! If you truly stand behind this point, you have essentially greenlighted the efficacy of HD add-ons for XB2 and PS3 alike.

 

[Diesel2]

is the argument as simple as ....

if developers cannot assume that a HD will be present, then they can't develop their engine to make use of it as standard?

Much like the situation of PS3 if it doesn't launch with HD attached.

I mean, if an Xbox360 user (say myself) doesn't have his HDD attached when he launches game X, then game X, cannot take advantage of said HDD. If game X has to take into account that HDD may not be attached, then the core gameplay of game x must be made to accomodate the lowest common denominator (e.g. Xbox360 without HDD attached) ?

Obviously game X can stipulate that HDD must be attached, but this would put Xbox360 pretty much in the same situation as PS3? e.g. if Gamer Y wants to play Game X, he/she will attach HDD to Xbox360, or purchase HDD for PS3?

 

[Carl B]

is the argument as simple as ....

if developers cannot assume that a HD will be present, then they can't develop their engine to make use of it as standard?

Much like the situation of PS3 if it doesn't launch with HD attached.

I mean, if an Xbox360 user (say myself) doesn't have his HDD attached when he launches game X, then game X, cannot take advantage of said HDD. If game X has to take into account that HDD may not be attached, then the core gameplay of game x must be made to accomodate the lowest common denominator (e.g. Xbox360 without HDD attached) ?

Obviously game X can stipulate that HDD must be attached, but this would put Xbox360 pretty much in the same situation as PS3? e.g. if Gamer Y wants to play Game X, he/she will attach HDD to Xbox360, or purchase HDD for PS3?

Yes that's pretty much correct - the 'lowest common denominator' assumption. But there could very well be exceptions to Microsoft's rule (there always are). Oblivion is supposedly a launch title, right? I think whatever devs are 'allowed' to do with the hard drive, we'll see an example of straight off with that game.

BTW, that's a title to look forward to.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Congratulations! If you truly stand behind this point, you have essentially greenlighted the efficacy of HD add-ons for XB2 and PS3 alike.

not really. i think not including it as standard is a stupid move for PS3 and i was extremely dissapointed when i found out Sony would not be including a HDD in their next-gen console, it's weak.

My point is, that even if, 4 or 5 years down the road they decide to not include the HD, you're still gonna have nearly everyone buying it, just because it's such a good value. The end result is that 99.x% of users will have a HDD attached, so as far as Dev's are concerned they will use it fully.

The real issue we're talking about is developer support right? Will they really use it? That all depends on the expected installed base.

It's a completely different situation than the PS3. I would be surprised if even 20% of PS3 users buy the aftermarket HD. So you won't see Dev's exploiting it nearly as much as the 360.

 

[randycat99]

Naturally, it is a doublestandard. How could we expect anything less.

 

[PARANOiA]

I see this as being a really stupid decision by MS. It should be a fantastic boon for devs resulting in a better user experience, but now it won't be.