J. Allard Interview Pt. 2

[PC-Engine]

But u claim that even with bluray they will be able to ship and meet demand . I will really like to see this happen .

Well if the demand is subpar due to a higher price like was the case with PSP during the US launch then maybe they would be able to meet demand...or lack thereof.

 

[rabidrabbit]

T

 

[jvd]

T

whats this post about ?

 

[rabidrabbit]

"T" short for "Thank You"
"Roll" to express sarcasm, as imo PC-Engine's post was yet another of his usual expected comments.

Sorry

 

[jvd]

"T" short for "Thank You"
"Roll" to express sarcasm, as imo PC-Engine's post was yet another of his usual expected comments.

Sorry

ah okay . Because u know i think that sony will need to make alot of consoles to keep up with demand (which is postive ) and bluray being new and so far from what i can tell only in one player on the market ( lets not even get into if a unified standard comes out ) could make it difficult for sony to meet the demand .

 

[rabidrabbit]

...Phew!

 

[WillFa]

I find it odd that in the US, Windows coming with IE is bad. In Europe, windows coming with WMP is bad. But no one has any problems with Sony pushing Blu-Ray in the PS3. I wonder if Real Networks had a stake in HD-DVD if we'd see another class action suit.

Intel's been trying to get Blue Tooth to take off for years. There's always been a lack of peripherals (the only really common ones that come to mind are Cellphone headsets) here. I don't see Blue Tooth as an advantage over MS's 2.4 GHz solution.

The great thing about USB ports is that if you need more of them, you can just plug in a hub. I currently have one sitting on my desk so I can plug in my Digital camera without bending under the desk... It's not that difficult of a solution.

From what I've read form the MS retailer's site, video connections are currently slated to be Component/S-Video, Composite, and VGA. If I had to take a guess, I'd think that the video encoder always puts out an analog signal before getting 'out of the box'. I think that's the problem with getting a straight digital DVI/HMDI connection.

 

[_xxx_]

Not really. What year did XBOX come out? 2001. What year is 360 coming out 2005. That's 4 years.

That has another reasons. XBox 1 was just a hacked PC and they wanted to become competitive and thus replaced the PC-based design with a true console. This one will last longer.

Just look how long PS2 was around. That's a "normal" lifetime of a console.

 

[jvd]

Not really. What year did XBOX come out? 2001. What year is 360 coming out 2005. That's 4 years.

That has another reasons. XBox 1 was just a hacked PC and they wanted to become competitive and thus replaced the PC-based design with a true console. This one will last longer.

Just look how long PS2 was around. That's a "normal" lifetime of a console.

How can you make these claims ? I actually think the cycle will be shorter with two evenly matched companys going for first place. I think we may see 4-5 years as the standard instead of 5-6 years

 

[London Geezer]

Not really. What year did XBOX come out? 2001. What year is 360 coming out 2005. That's 4 years.

That has another reasons. XBox 1 was just a hacked PC and they wanted to become competitive and thus replaced the PC-based design with a true console. This one will last longer.

Just look how long PS2 was around. That's a "normal" lifetime of a console.

How can you make these claims ? I actually think the cycle will be shorter with two evenly matched companys going for first place. I think we may see 4-5 years as the standard instead of 5-6 years

I think 4-5 years is just fine, i mean think about it, the thing will cost 300 quid. That's 60-70 quid a year, or about 5 quid a month for hours on end of playing time. Of course we spend money on the games, but those shouldn't be counted in, as we'd spend money on games on either generation.

I think that's quite amazing value, i'm not sure why anyone would complain.

 

[mckmas8808]

I think 4-5 years is just fine

Ok 4 years is way too short. It would make absolutly no sense to make a new console just to end it in 4 years. Wouldn't the console maker want to make their money back on the hardware itself. You know once you start profiting the money from hardware and software could generate more money for the next generation.

Just because the Xbox did it this time does not mean it will be the desired choice. For the reasons that xxx said the X360 should have a longer lifespan. And there's a thread just started that stated the Xbox still has a lot of life in it.
________
Vapormatic

 

[Alpha_Spartan]

I think that the Xbox could suffer by not supporting HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. It won't be long before games fill the DVD (infact I think 'Elder Scrolls: Oblivion' already has :? ) and I can see games such as GTA making use of the extra space available on Blu-Ray.

Yes, but Rockstar nor anyone else will want to spend the money to hire extra artists to fill the disc up with that much content. I mean, think about BR. How much would it cost to fill that up with content? Developers aren't working with bottomless wallets. I like MS approach. According Allard in the interview, not many developers used the second layer in the Xbox 360's dual layer disc. That's huge. That shows that the majority of developers aren't ready for larger storage. We also have to remember something else that Allard mentioned, which is Xbox 360's implementation of procedural synthesis where instead of creating 500 trees on the media, you have a program that creates trees.

Lastly, I won't be surprised if half of the features Sony announced for the PS3 doesn't make it in the final product.

 

[London Geezer]

Mckmas you so need to chill...

I said 4-5 years is just fine, and explained my reasons, and saying that It would make absolutly no sense to make a new console just to end it in 4 years is way over the top.

Why does it make absolutely no sense??

Just because some consoles have lasted longer than that, it doesn't mean there should be a standardisation of console lifecycles.

If one company is ready to release a new platform after 4 years of the first, not many people will mind.

In fact, i think there's more people nagging about "wanting a new playstation", cause the old one is showing its age, and has been for quite a while. Same for Xbox in fact.

 

[London Geezer]

Lastly, I won't be surprised if half of the features Sony announced for the PS3 doesn't make it in the final product.

Such as? :|

 

[mckmas8808]

Mckmas you so need to chill...

I said 4-5 years is just fine, and explained my reasons, and saying that It would make absolutly no sense to make a new console just to end it in 4 years is way over the top.

Why does it make absolutely no sense??

Just because some consoles have lasted longer than that, it doesn't mean there should be a standardisation of console lifecycles.

If one company is ready to release a new platform after 4 years of the first, not many people will mind.

In fact, i think there's more people nagging about "wanting a new playstation", cause the old one is showing its age, and has been for quite a while. Same for Xbox in fact.

Ok so if the Xbox 3 came out at the end of 2009 and both PS4 and Nintendo N6 came out in 2011, you would see that as a potential problem for MS? The thing is london-boy developers would have enough time to fully utilize everything that the hardware is capable of. And why would MS want to add the expense of a new console say fast when they should be profiting on the X360?

In my eyes and a lot of other people eyes mainly developers they would easily see 4 years as too short. Do you not read about what developers are saying now about the Xbox. I could see why they did it this time, but next-gen I hope for the sake of X360 buyers that MS holds at least 5 years.

And do you forget that everybody doesn't just have huge bank accounts to spend $300 on a new console and $50 on completly new games. Look at the PS2 now. There games that are coming out for less than $40 brand new. And also the fact that $20 best-seller games are a dime a dozen. Me and my friends are actually finding it hard to play so many great games at the sametime. When consoles are cheaper and games are cheaper the consumer benefits. And thats what we want. Not short 4 year time spans.

The PS2 is the oldest console and is in it's 6th year, but to my amazement it has the most great games coming this year. And believe me this is only a positive for Sony and a negative for MS.
________
List of mazda platforms specifications

 

[EndR]

Regarding the space-comments between DVD and Blu Ray..

A game like Oblivion, which has been in development for about 3 years, with next gen graphics, voice-overs, over 50+ hours of gameplay etc etc, fits in a DVD... this surely shows that the DVD-media still holds its own weight.

So, how costly and how much time will it take the devs to "fill" a Blu-ray disc? Devs are already complaining about higher costs.. why make it more expensive "just to fill" a disc?

Oblivion will be one of the biggest games, with its huge worlds and randomly generated stuff.. and if all that fits in a DVD, then Im happy because the future is bright, for the DVD-format...

 

[London Geezer]

Ok so if the Xbox 3 came out at the end of 2009 and both PS4 and Nintendo N6 came out in 2011, you would see that as a potential problem for MS?

No... Not sure why u ask?

The thing is london-boy developers would have enough time to fully utilize everything that the hardware is capable of.

Yes, and i'm saying that a 4 year life cycle is not much of an issue. I see a 6 year life cycle as more of an issue to be honest, whether the devs might have "more time to get power out of existing consoles". In the end it's still old hardware. This whole "squeezing power" or "there's still life left in the platform" sound a lot like Internet nagging material. People like eyecandy and new stuff. A new toy every 4-5 years is good enough, that's all i'm saying. We're not talking cars here.

And why would MS want to add the expense of a new console say fast when they should be profiting on the X360?

What i'm saying is that 4 years is not "fast". But you're welcome to disagree.

In my eyes and a lot of other people eyes mainly developers they would easily see 4 years as too short.

Why?

Do you not read about what developers are saying now about the Xbox.

What are they saying? That they haven't reached the full power of the platform?
We'd need to ask them what they prefer, tapping into old hardware, or start working on the new generation. I can't speak for them.

Economically, it sure makes sense for them to release games on the old platform, but i'm not talking about economy, i'm talking about the consumers, and the consumers like their new next-gen gadgets more than "let me see what my old Xbox can really do", cause in the end it's still vastly underpowered compared to the new Xbox.

I could see why they did it this time, but next-gen I hope for the sake of X360 buyers that MS holds at least 5 years.

Why would you, the consumer, the player, prefer that? Really, i think mostly everyone would be happier to see the "next gen" earlier, cause personally, waiting another year for bloody PS3 and X360 is killing me.

And do you forget that everybody doesn't just have huge bank accounts to spend $300 on a new console and $50 on completly new games.

What on earth...
Look, if you don't have 300 quid to spend every 4 years, you probably dont have them to spend every 5 years either. Also, you'd spend 50 quid for the games whether the console lasts 5 years or 6 or 10, or are you gonna stop buying games altogether?

Look at the PS2 now. There games that are coming out for less than $40 brand new. And also the fact that $20 best-seller games are a dime a dozen.

Here in the UK, games cost exactly the same as they did at launch. The fact that there are cheap "platinum" range games is another matter. They're not new games.

Me and my friends are actually finding it hard to play so many great games at the sametime. When consoles are cheaper and games are cheaper the consumer benefits. And thats what we want. Not short 4 year time spans.

Suits you.

The PS2 is the oldest console and is in it's 6th year, but to my amazement it has the most great games coming this year. And believe me this is only a positive for Sony and a negative for MS.

I'm sure Ps2 has some great games, but i don't know why you're correlating that to the fact that it has a 6 year lifespan.

PS2 has very good games (and will have in the future) because of Sony's effort with 3rd party developers, as well as their 1st and 2nd party studios.

The fact that it has a long lifecycle only means that people like me will have to keep playing technologically old games till next year at least, and although i will enjoy every second of Shadow of the Colossus and some other games, PS2 and Xbox games started to show their age a long time ago.

 

[nelg]

IMHO, the absence of a HD DVD drive and HDMI/DVI is a good business decision. It would relatively simple for MS to change the drive and add the HDMI/DVI output and market a special version, perhaps coinciding with the release of the Ps3. It would probably allow them to price it the same as the Ps3 and reduce the price of the original, certainly a good way to thwart Sony

 

[London Geezer]

IMHO, the absence of a HD DVD drive and HDMI/DVI is a good business decision. It would relatively simple for MS to change the drive and add the HDMI/DVI output and market a special version, perhaps coinciding with the release of the Ps3. It would probably allow them to price it the same as the Ps3 and reduce the price of the original, certainly a good way to thwart Sony

As long as all the games still come out on DVD, i would definately be happy with an X360 that plays HDDVDs.
But the games will have to stay on DVD or the people who bought the first version would be mightily pissed off.

 

[AlNom]

As long as all the games still come out on DVD, i would definately be happy with an X360 that plays HDDVDs.
But the games will have to stay on DVD or the people who bought the first version would be mightily pissed off.

As it is, there's probably no good reason to actually shift games to HDDVDs. If they were to have two versions of the 360 on the market, they could just have two versions of the game DVD/HDDVD.