New Xbox360 Game To Require Hard Drive To Play

[Phil]

Well i think it becomes a much bigger deal if the userbase was 80% with NO hard drive instead of 80% with, as is the case for the 360. As it stands now youre only possibly losing a percentage of the 20% without a HD.

I'm still not convinced the split is at 90 or even 80% - if it is, then only because Microsoft has control over the units their shipping while their product is still limited by production and not demand. In 2 to 3 years down the road when casuals will have started picking up the xbox360, you'll see the split more and more in favor of the core SKU, not the premium one. Would that make you change your mind?

IMO, as a consumer - the two SKUs is scary. Knowing that there are games that will not work on the basic model - contrary to what Microsoft has stated - it practically makes that choice non-existant if you don't want to worry about games not working. Especially when you figure out that those people that did opt to by the core SKU can now look forward to expensive upgrading if they want to enjoy those games that do require a HD.

 

[ChryZ]

There is a HDD-less 360 userbase? The electronics store around the corner got a nice pill of 12 dusty core packs.

 

[Gerry]

IMO, as a consumer - the two SKUs is scary. Knowing that there are games that will not work on the basic model - contrary to what Microsoft has stated - it practically makes that choice non-existant if you don't want to worry about games not working. Especially when you figure out that those people that did opt to by the core SKU can now look forward to expensive upgrading if they want to enjoy those games that do require a HD.

Sorry, but this is getting bonkers now. Scary? Nonsense. As a consumer, if you find a game that doesn't work with basic model, you buy the hard disk. What's scary about that? We don't even know how many games fall into this category yet, if any. In 2 to 3 years how much is the 20G HD upgrade going to cost? Probably less than the price of the game.

The only people who should be concerned about the multiple SKUs are the developers, since they're the ones that have to add extra code to cope with both situations (or not as the case may be). If it's not an issue with them (and is there any evidence that developers are that bothered?) then who cares?

And didn't somebody show above that the official Microsoft stance is that the HD may be necessary for some games? When did they state that ALL games will work on the core system? Genuine question. Their stance now is certainly that that isn't the case. Has it changed at some point?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And didn't somebody show above that the official Microsoft stance is that the HD may be necessary for some games? When did they state that ALL games will work on the core system? Genuine question. Their stance now is certainly that that isn't the case. Has it changed at some point?

I dunno, but I certainly have followed the media with the impression of MS saying all games must work with the HDD. Either they misreported it, or I read it wrong, or MS changed their stance, but it's a common (mis)conception that all games are supposed to be able to work without HDD. I'm not sufficiently interested in the subject to spend time looking for quotes though

 

[rounin]

http://www.edge-online.co.uk/archives/2005/10/microsoft_respo.php

Allard said: “I don’t know who we’ve let down. There isn’t a game on 360 that you can’t play without a hard drive, so I think that’s a good thing for consumers."..."You buy the Xbox 360 Core system, you can build up to the premium system and you won’t be left out of anything along the way. You can pace into this however you want, unlike any of the traditional categories."

Dont know if its been previously posted. Either way the general misconception has its source in the lies MS has been telling.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thanks for finding that. I dunno about 'lies'. It might well be at that point in time they were going to ensure all games had to play without HDD, and then changed their mind.

 

[expletive]

I'm still not convinced the split is at 90 or even 80% - if it is, then only because Microsoft has control over the units their shipping while their product is still limited by production and not demand. In 2 to 3 years down the road when casuals will have started picking up the xbox360, you'll see the split more and more in favor of the core SKU, not the premium one. Would that make you change your mind?

IMO, as a consumer - the two SKUs is scary. Knowing that there are games that will not work on the basic model - contrary to what Microsoft has stated - it practically makes that choice non-existant if you don't want to worry about games not working. Especially when you figure out that those people that did opt to by the core SKU can now look forward to expensive upgrading if they want to enjoy those games that do require a HD.

Theres been numerous news stories and interviews that peg the mix at around 80/20, several of those by Peter Moore.

To argue that it is that way because MS is controlling the stock, well yeah maybe, but until they control the stock in another direction or people stop choosing the premium overwhelmingly over the core, the fact remains that a vast majority of the population has a hard drive. It seems as if it will remain that way for the forseeable future too.

I'm not sure waht you mean by scary. No one has to 'worry' about anything becuase you can always go pick up a hard drive if you want. The only way anyone should worry is if their core model couldnt be made into a premium, which is not the case.

 

[London Geezer]

Thanks for finding that. I dunno about 'lies'. It might well be at that point in time they were going to ensure all games had to play without HDD, and then changed their mind.

They seem to have "changed their minds" on many things. Problem is that when you're a company as big as MS (or Sony or anyone else), changing your mind all the time makes it look like you have no idea what you're doing, which in turns makes potential buyers stay well clear of the company's product.

 

[expletive]

Thanks for finding that. I dunno about 'lies'. It might well be at that point in time they were going to ensure all games had to play without HDD, and then changed their mind.

I dont know why people have such a problem with this either. Is it really that big a deal that an MMORPG and a football game will require a hard drive? Did anyone ever believe FFXI could be done without one?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I dont know why people have such a problem with this either.

The problem is a tiddly little one, where a few people may have bought Core packs without HDDs on the misinformation that these systems would be able to play all games. These people will have paid out $60 on a memory card instead of HDD only to find they need a $100 HDD to play 'some' games (unquantified amount). As the entry level pack is $360 (when you factor in you need an overpriced memory card) and the HDD is only $40 more plus goodies, it makes MS's pricepoints kinda silly. It's just marketting, having a $299 advertised price and leaving off the cost of the essential memory device. In real terms, why produce the 2 SKU's? Are the so-called price sensitive markets really that sensitive to $40?! How's about the entry SKU has the Core+HDD and no other junk at $360, same price as the exhorbitant MC?

This (probably small) game situation is another reason why the 2 SKU market seems daft, because the price differential between playing most games and playing all games+lots of other stuff is only 40 bucks.

 

[GB123]

They seem to have "changed their minds" on many things. Problem is that when you're a company as big as MS (or Sony or anyone else), changing your mind all the time makes it look like you have no idea what you're doing, which in turns makes potential buyers stay well clear of the company's product.

I don't think that is true at all, they may have said something which they later had no control over, they could have said to this developer you can't make this game with HDD compatibility only!!, and they could have said well i will go and develop for the PS3 then.

MS may have thought they could dictate how developers made their games but when it comes down to it if they want that game on the 360 they have to keep the developer relatively happy, in turn meaning they might of had to retract certain things.

 

[Vennt]

I don't think that is true at all, they may have said something which they later had no control over, they could have said to this developer you can't make this game with HDD compatibility only!!, and they could have said well i will go and develop for the PS3 then.

MS may have thought they could dictate how developers made their games but when it comes down to it if they want that game on the 360 they have to keep the developer relatively happy, in turn meaning they might of had to retract certain things.

If this was the case then they should minimize the effects on the userbase by consolidating into 1 SKU that is HDD inclusive, and do this as early as possible so that future use of the HDD can be maximized.

The only reason to continue to provide a HDD-Less SKU after the point they realise this is going to happen is to bilk the customer for greater $$$.

 

[expletive]

If this was the case then they should minimize the effects on the userbase by consolidating into 1 SKU that is HDD inclusive, and do this as early as possible so that future use of the HDD can be maximized.

The only reason to continue to provide a HDD-Less SKU after the point they realise this is going to happen is to bilk the customer for greater $$$.

No thats not the idea of the core pack. Read my previous posts to get a better idea what the strategic goals of it were/are.

 

[expletive]

The problem is a tiddly little one, where a few people may have bought Core packs without HDDs on the misinformation that these systems would be able to play all games. These people will have paid out $60 on a memory card instead of HDD only to find they need a $100 HDD to play 'some' games (unquantified amount). As the entry level pack is $360 (when you factor in you need an overpriced memory card) and the HDD is only $40 more plus goodies, it makes MS's pricepoints kinda silly. It's just marketting, having a $299 advertised price and leaving off the cost of the essential memory device. In real terms, why produce the 2 SKU's? Are the so-called price sensitive markets really that sensitive to $40?! How's about the entry SKU has the Core+HDD and no other junk at $360, same price as the exhorbitant MC?

This (probably small) game situation is another reason why the 2 SKU market seems daft, because the price differential between playing most games and playing all games+lots of other stuff is only 40 bucks.

Its a minimal price difference now, but the idea is that (as was the case with the xbox1) over time, theyll be able to reduce costs on practically every component in the box with the exception of the HD. Buying CPUS from intel, GPUs from nvidia, and HDs from seagate, were all parts that they had no control over and were thorns in their side throughout the life of the xbox 1 becuase they had no control over cost efficiencies on them.

I think you need to look beyond costs and prices today and look down the road a little to see where MS is coming from. The 'fixed price' of the HD becomes a larger and larger % of the system's cost over time.

 

[Sis]

http://www.edge-online.co.uk/archives/2005/10/microsoft_respo.php



Dont know if its been previously posted. Either way the general misconception has its source in the lies MS has been telling.

It's funny, this story is being reported by the press in two ways:

1) MS lied even though from the beginning they've talked about some games requiring the hard drive, such as MMOs. The quote above is specifically talking about the launch. In other words, "isn't" does not mean "will never". It's extrememly odd that some here forget that Final Fantasy XI was announced a long time ago, and it requires a hard drive.

2) The other way is: "Hey, MS was right--even if the HDD isn't standard, developers will still use it."

To me, the second one is the right attitude. Here we have proof that the hard drive will be used by developers, regardless of the two SKUs issue. It makes it more ironic, given the arguments of some in this very thread that two SKUs is bad. Shifty's the only one that said it may suck for the consumer, but let's be honest: the consumer might be frustrated with MS but they can either add on the hard drive or not buy the game.

 

[Sis]

If this was the case then they should minimize the effects on the userbase by consolidating into 1 SKU that is HDD inclusive, and do this as early as possible so that future use of the HDD can be maximized.

The only reason to continue to provide a HDD-Less SKU after the point they realise this is going to happen is to bilk the customer for greater $$$.

If only 10% of all games ever require a hard drive, why on earth would you force everyone to buy the hard drive? And I think 10% is being generous--it'll probalby end up 1-2%, or about 10 to 20 titles at the end.

To me, it's fairly straightforward: if you want the hard drive--and I don't know why you wouldn't--just buy the pack with the hard drive.

 

[Vennt]

I was responding to GB123's theory of changing circumstance pushing MS's hand.

Previously, at the time of the Dual-SKU announcement, it was claimed that only MMO's would be the exception, revisionism isn't going to change that, now it's MMO's and a sports title, whos to say it's only going to be 1-10% of titles? - Wishful thinking isn't indicative of fact.

Personally I don't think that theres any place for a HDD-less SKU, the only thing it does is promote lesser use of the HDD overall, and it would be in the benefit of all 360 owners for HDD to be considered the "standard", this can't happen whilst there is a HDD-less SKU.

 

[rounin]

They seem to have "changed their minds" on many things. Problem is that when you're a company as big as MS (or Sony or anyone else), changing your mind all the time makes it look like you have no idea what you're doing, which in turns makes potential buyers stay well clear of the company's product.

Personally I think this is the correct way of looking at this issue. It really makes MS look very amateurish. At least in this easterner's eyes

 

[Sis]

I was responding to GB123's theory of changing circumstance pushing MS's hand.

Previously, at the time of the Dual-SKU announcement, it was claimed that only MMO's would be the exception, revisionism isn't going to change that, now it's MMO's and a sports title, whos to say it's only going to be 1-10% of titles? - Wishful thinking isn't indicative of fact.

Personally I don't think that theres any place for a HDD-less SKU, the only thing it does is promote lesser use of the HDD overall, and it would be in the benefit of all 360 owners for HDD to be considered the "standard", this can't happen whilst there is a HDD-less SKU.

A sports title? I think you're twisting it a bit much. It's a sports sim. And I base the low amount on probable releases: MMOs and Sims. I don't see those taking up the bulk of Xbox 360 shelf space.

Also, I don't know that MS ever claimed any detail around exceptions, other than to use an MMO as an example.

 

[Sis]

the only thing it does is promote lesser use of the HDD overall, and it would be in the benefit of all 360 owners for HDD to be considered the "standard", this can't happen whilst there is a HDD-less SKU.

Also, this was the irony I was talking about.