Allard on HDD

[chachi]

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.

The difference with the PS3 is that as far as we know it isn't going to build an initial userbase with the hard drive included. If that's the case it'll be seen as a peripheral rather than an integral part of the system.

I'm not MS so I can't say what they're doing, but if they do it right it'd be more like a BTO type situation than anything, you pick up your new X360 and pick out the size hard drive you want and some games, an extra controller and whatever other crap you need and then go pay for it. As long as it's not an additional cost (X360 + HD <= initial price of console) then users should be happy to have a choice. Whether people figure that out, possibly not.

 

[danteye]

wait...are you talking about the possibility that x360 will be sold without HD????

 

[Gholbine]

I think they'll ship with 2 versions of the Xbox 360, one with a HDD and one without, same as PS3.

If developers can't use the HDD for caching or streaming, then there's absolutely no point in making consumers pay for it even when they may not use it.

If it's true that developers cannot code their engines with the HDD in mind, then this is a very strange move by Microsoft and a big blow to the Xbox 360.

 

[croc hunter2]

There has been an awful lot of smoke that there will be 2 versions shipping. Two analysts and now some members of the press believe that this is the case.

If it is then MS would be better off releasing the console w/o HDD and just sell it an addon. As has been pointed out MS have decreed that you cannot assume the HDD is attached. I cannot see the point of releasing 2 skus, and what does the HDD give u. A place to store music? Xbox live data? A decent size USB key could do this.

Me = confused

 

[Carl B]

There will only be one version of the 360 at launch. That system will include a hard drive. If the existing preponderance of evidence weren't enough, well there's an interview with Allard four pages ago on which this thread is based verifying it.

 

[Tap In]

....As has been pointed out MS have decreed that you cannot assume the HDD is attached. .....

When you have a peripheral that is *removable* you have to have that edict.

Just as the Devs can not count on a memory card being there. It's just to insure that the system will still run in a situation where the HDD is out at a friends house being used on their X360 (which was the intent in making it removable, like a giant 20gig memeory card).

He hints at the possibility of a SKU in the future which may not have one depending on Gamers desires (which I take to only mean "never say never if the market demands it").

 

[Tap In]

There will only be one version of the 360 at launch. That system will include a hard drive. ...snip...

quoted for emphasis.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

The alarm bells are ringing for nothing IMO. The first 10 million hardcore Xbox 360 gamers are going to have a hard drive. That's enough that a developer that wants to use it can do so without fear. Look how many games early adopters buy: I own 45 Xbox games. It wouldn't surprise me if the first 5 million Xbox owners buy more games than the last 15 million combined. ie. They buy 3 times as many games.

MS is satisfying early adopter concerns by including the hard drive, while leaving the option open for removing it when they go to a shrunken $99 model. Sounds like a really smart decision to me.

 

[London Geezer]

The alarm bells are ringing for nothing IMO. The first 10 million hardcore Xbox 360 gamers are going to have a hard drive. That's enough that a developer that wants to use it can do so without fear. Look how many games early adopters buy: I own 45 Xbox games. It wouldn't surprise me if the first 5 million Xbox owners buy more games than the last 15 million combined. ie. They buy 3 times as many games.

MS is satisfying early adopter concerns by including the hard drive, while leaving the option open for removing it when they go to a shrunken $99 model. Sounds like a really smart decision to me.

It doesn't to me. Why would they just decide to divide their userbase when the X360 becomes established?
If some games require the HDD, they won't work anymore with the cheaper HDD-less consoles.
If none of the games actually require a HDD, what's the point of having it by default?

 

[BlueTsunami]

It doesn't to me. Why would they just decide to divide their userbase when the X360 becomes established?
If some games require the HDD, they won't work anymore with the cheaper HDD-less consoles.
If none of the games actually require a HDD, what's the point of having it by default?

Exactly, they can really save on costs if they where to sell the HDD separetly. If the only real application for the XB360's HDD is a MemoryCard (for game saves and Media) then whats the point of bundling it if its not essential to run certain games?

I personally feel that bundling the HDD with a Live! package at your local gaming store (or Best Buy, Circuit City etc etc) would have been a better idea...but I guess they want to sell the complete package from the beginning. But with this known now (and the question some people probably want to ask but are afraid to), doesn't this all just drop the HDD functionality of the XB360 down to PS3's level? (As far as Developers use for the HDD and what you can actually do with it.)

Edit: I have a bad feeling i'm going to get pounced on for asking that question >.> <.<

 

[Johnny Awesome]

You guys are missing the point: Which is for MS to satisfy consumers. Sony didn't care about splitting their userbase when they removed functionality from the PS2 when they brought out PSTwo and neither should MS. The hard drive will be optional for later X360 owners that buy the cheap $99 model. That won't change the fact that millions and possibly tens of millions of early adopters will have hard drives in their X360, which will still justify development for some games, particularly games aimed at the hard core users like MMORPG.

It doesn't surprise me that hardcore Sony fans on this board are claiming the sky is falling on this issue. It's pretty much par for the course around here.

 

[BlueTsunami]

You guys are missing the point: Which is for MS to satisfy consumers. Sony didn't care about splitting their userbase when they removed functionality from the PS2 when they brought out PSTwo and neither should MS. The hard drive will be optional for later X360 owners that buy the cheap $99 model. That won't change the fact that millions and possibly tens of millions of early adopters will have hard drives in their X360, which will still justify development for some games, particularly games aimed at the hard core users like MMORPG.

It doesn't surprise me that hardcore Sony fans on this board are claiming the sky is falling on this issue. It's pretty much par for the course around here.

I don't really see the problem with the HDD being used as what it seems like its going to be used for (that sentence messes with my head). Was caching games to the HDD of the 360 ever an actual thing that was going to happen? I'm perfectly satisfied with an HDD being used as storage and thats it....but alot of Xbox fans where banking on the fact that the HDD would be used for more than that.

 

[function]

Exactly, they can really save on costs if they where to sell the HDD separetly. If the only real application for the XB360's HDD is a MemoryCard (for game saves and Media) then whats the point of bundling it if its not essential to run certain games?

Becuase they want to be seen to be offering the same functionality that the original Xbox had, and because backwards compatability won't work without it (and while almost nobody uses backwards compatability, it a good PR bullet point).

They want to shape initial perception of the machine, and encourage certain useage. They don't want to lock themselves into paying for an expensive part in a rapidly cheapening device. They've given themselves the option of putting the cost of that device over to customer as time goes by. As the typical buyer becomes less "hardcore", the importance of a HDD (especially initially) will be smaller (if not insignificant).

Putting a HDD in every machine as standard, when the vast majority of apps simply don't need it, is ultimately a bad idea. Xbox vs PS2 showed this clearly. Bundling it with your launch machines when a high price and lots of features are expected is a different situation to trying to put out a $99 console that you break even on.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Becuase they want to be seen to be offering the same functionality that the original Xbox had, and because backwards compatability won't work without it (and while almost nobody uses backwards compatability, it a good PR bullet point).

They want to shape initial perception of the machine, and encourage certain useage. They don't want to lock themselves into paying for an expensive part in a rapidly cheapening device. They've given themselves the option of putting the cost of that device over to customer as time goes by. As the typical buyer becomes less "hardcore", the importance of a HDD (especially initially) will be smaller (if not insignificant).

Putting a HDD in every machine as standard, when the vast majority of apps simply don't need it, is ultimately a bad idea. Xbox vs PS2 showed this clearly. Bundling it with your launch machines when a high price and lots of features are expected is a different situation to trying to put out a $99 console that you break even on.

Yeah, so I could see why they would off a system without the HDD. I also see how the Backwards Compatability would be an issue simply because they need the HDD to run original Xbox games. Its not an issue for me, simply because when I do get the 360 i'll want to the HDD to (if it was sold separetly...I would have gone out and buy the HDD to).

I just figure, why not sell it separetly to begin with? The hardcore gamers (if they really wanted the HDD) would buy a separete HDD that Microsoft was selling at the launch of the 360...and with the HDD out separetly it would allow people (at launch) to decide if they want the HDD or not.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

A valid question, and I think consumer perception is the answer to your question. MS wants hardcore Xbox users to feel that they are getting everything they got with Xbox inside the box (and more).

 

[London Geezer]

A valid question, and I think consumer perception is the answer to your question. MS wants hardcore Xbox users to feel that they are getting everything they got with Xbox inside the box (and more).

Well i'm pretty sure that this time around what we called "hardcore gamers" before will be seriously looking at PS3 as their next geekathon console, bought together with the HDD.

In the end, if NO games on X360 will actually require the HDD, i see no point in including it as standard. If it's not required, it shouldn't be standard. Backward compatibility shouldn't matter, and MS know that.

But i'm pretty sure some games will actually require it.

 

[Titanio]

A valid question, and I think consumer perception is the answer to your question. MS wants hardcore Xbox users to feel that they are getting everything they got with Xbox inside the box (and more).

That's a nice trick. I'd much prefer to have the option to buy it if it's optional for games.

 

[BlueTsunami]

A valid question, and I think consumer perception is the answer to your question. MS wants hardcore Xbox users to feel that they are getting everything they got with Xbox inside the box (and more).

Yeah, that is true..because it is a fact that the people most likely to get a HDD (if it was sold separetly) would be the early buyers of consoles. Heh..i've known people who are just getting a PS2 O.O . So offer the HDD in the launch console and down the line off a Non-HDD version (HDD being sold separetly) seems to be the ultimate plan.

I wonder (if games do "use" the HDD in any ways, besides MMORPG's,), how will DEV's manage with their games, the fact that a HDD may not always be on the system. Also, how will it affect a game that will "need" the HDD. Will the game have longer load times? or will it now work at all? and it would seem that the DEVs would have to somehow program the games on how to act if there is not HDD present (if it supports HDD and a NON-HDD 360)

 

[London Geezer]

Whatever, if they start selling X360's without HDD a couple of years down the line, they'll have made a Sony. Not good.

 

[BlueTsunami]

they'll have made a Sony. Not good.

LOL..that made laugh....

oops, I made a Sony :insert blush smiley: