News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually with PC ports, a full catalogue of games doesn't seem unlikely. It depends on porting effort. The eSRAM design will make that a little trickier on Durango. There could even be HD rereleases of existing games using higher quality assets. Battlefields and Borderlands and Diablo 3 can all get HD releases for, presumably, very little effort. As download titles, the next-gen consoles would offer the best early-adopter experience in gaming history (at least regards games library. One can argue about new experiences being more important).
 
Source engine for a next gen title?
I'd suspect it's the "next major version of Source" rather than what we have now (which is already quite a bit different from what we had with first Source games)
 
I'd suspect it's the "next major version of Source" rather than what we have now (which is already quite a bit different from what we had with first Source games)

Yah, but the valve has stated that the first title to use it will be episode 3, and don't think that it will be released this fall
 
The thing is this kotaku rumors don´t make sense with previous leaks:

The mantra was: alpha=beta=retail, so what´s up wih games and soft behind schedule? Durango, and orbis for that matter are Pcs.

Lots of games get cancel or suffer delays (wrong concept, bad execution, ect...) , i don't think it has to do anything with hardware. Maybe MS just realized that the games they are developing are not reaching the quality they expected and some are getting delayed to improve them.

EDIT:

From Kotaku

Microsoft recently cancelled several internal next-gen projects because they were not coming together as hoped.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You remember last generation console hardware specs more fondly then I do. The RSX and Xenos, from a raw spec point of view, seem to fall more in line with Nvidia and ATI midrange offering versus their highend offering at the time.


The RSX yes the Xenos no,it had unified shader which wasn't present even on $500 dollar cards on 2005,in fact the Xenos is more advance than the 7800GTX which was going by $500 on 2005.

The X1900XT was a little ahead of the Xenos,not by much.
 
Exactly. Thank you. When you buy a console, you're not just paying for a console, but all of the content it gives you access to.


That is ridiculous dude to the extreme,when you pay for consoles you pay for the hardware the software is apart and in no way you are charge upfront.

You pay for what is inside of the console,on this market that has always mean hardware,Nintendo Wii console was tag as cheap because it had basically GC level graphics the CPU and GPU were not a real improvements.

The xbox 360 was a huge jump over the xbox,which is why people praise their hardware,and why so many can't believe that MS really has this specs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is ridiculous dude to the extreme,when you pay for consoles you pay for the hardware the software is apart and in no way you are charge upfront.

You pay for what is inside of the console,on this market that has always mean hardware,Nintendo Wii console was tag as cheap because it had basically GC level graphics the CPU and GPU were not a real improvements.

The xbox 360 was a huge jump over the xbox,which is why people praise their hardware,and why so many can't believe that MS really has this specs.

Sorry mate dont agree, software and services are hugely complex and expensive things these days, comparing the wii to next gen doesn't make sense as Nintendo has always been poor in relation to ui software and services.

Wii was a very poor console in every way except the controller and size.

I suspect we will see all sorts of new content that costs millions of R&D not to mention exclusive content/cable providers deals...
 
Is this your first console launch? Since when has any console had a "full slate of AAAA games"? At best, there is one system selling title, hoping for any more is crazy talk.


yup. it's actually pretty much strategy to NOT launch a (3d) mario or Halo with a system anymore. You wont be seeing Uncharted 4 debuting on the PS4 launch day either.

Probably makes financial sense too. Userbase is too low. system will sell out regardless. etc etc.
 
Sorry mate dont agree, software and services are hugely complex and expensive things these days, comparing the wii to next gen doesn't make sense as Nintendo has always been poor in relation to ui software and services.

Wii was a very poor console in every way except the controller and size.

I suspect we will see all sorts of new content that costs millions of R&D not to mention exclusive content/cable providers deals...


That has nothing to do with it is not what he was talking about,he is trying to imply that on hardware you get charge for access to content,that is not right at all.

You get charge for the hardware,the software is charge to you apart,it has been like this since consoles started,and i don't think netflix or hulu,can increase the cost of a console,that is silly every one get those apps for free every where.

The xbox getting cable providers will mean nothing,since i am 100% sure cable companies will charge you for it or MS.
 
That has nothing to do with it is not what he was talking about,he is trying to imply that on hardware you get charge for access to content,that is not right at all.

You get charge for the hardware,the software is charge to you apart,it has been like this since consoles started,and i don't think netflix or hulu,can increase the cost of a console,that is silly every one get those apps for free every where.

The xbox getting cable providers will mean nothing,since i am 100% sure cable companies will charge you for it or MS.

The Wii showed quite clearly that the perceived value of a console (and therefore the price that a vendor can charge for it) is not solely based on the hardware it contains. The content the console enables is a strong factor, as is the price of the competition. I believe that Wii Sports had a lot more to do with the perceived value of the Wii then it's CPU or GPU did.
 
The Wii showed quite clearly that the perceived value of a console (and therefore the price that a vendor can charge for it) is not solely based on the hardware it contains. The content the console enables is a strong factor, as is the price of the competition. I believe that Wii Sports had a lot more to do with the perceived value of the Wii then it's CPU or GPU did.


The wii was basically a gimmick hit,nintendo got lucky,and by now is dead,they got lucky and the Wii U horrible sales is a testament to that,the wii appealed to non gamers as well,i know my dad has one and he has never ever been a gamer or likes games,but he did like wii fit,which by the way did not came with the unit and was sold to him apart.

Wii sport came with basically every unit.
 
The wii was basically a gimmick hit...
Wherein you fail to understand the actual point. Wii was a success despite the price not being at all representative of the BOM or hardware capability. That's the take home message - final retail price is not tied to BOM, and only people with zero concept of economics in a free market will keep looking at a BOM and expecting that to reflect the retail price. Retail price can be far higher or lower than BOM, for any product.

bkilian is also right in that buying a console isn't about buying hardware, but buying into an experience. It's like buying a key where the value isn't in the metal that the key is made of, but in the room to which is allows entry. The cost of the console includes the opportunity to buy into platform exclusive games and services, like a paid-membership club. Pay £30 a year to join the diners club, and then you'll be allowed to pay to visit restaurants for special meals at special times that non-members don't have. Nintendo's a good example of that. The value of Nintendo's hardware is greatly tied to the quality of the platform exclusives that it enables you to play. Everyone buying a Nintendo console is buying it to gain access to that library, as if the box of electronics is a key to the Nintendo toy chest.
 
Wherein you fail to understand the actual point. Wii was a success despite the price not being at all representative of the BOM or hardware capability. That's the take home message - final retail price is not tied to BOM, and only people with zero concept of economics in a free market will keep looking at a BOM and expecting that to reflect the retail price. Retail price can be far higher or lower than BOM, for any product.

bkilian is also right in that buying a console isn't about buying hardware, but buying into an experience. It's like buying a key where the value isn't in the metal that the key is made of, but in the room to which is allows entry. The cost of the console includes the opportunity to buy into platform exclusive games and services, like a paid-membership club. Pay £30 a year to join the diners club, and then you'll be allowed to pay to visit restaurants for special meals at special times that non-members don't have. Nintendo's a good example of that. The value of Nintendo's hardware is greatly tied to the quality of the platform exclusives that it enables you to play. Everyone buying a Nintendo console is buying it to gain access to that library, as if the box of electronics is a key to the Nintendo toy chest.
I don't think it's worth debating him Shifty, he's being deliberately obtuse now. He has decided something and won't let pesky facts or data get in the way of his ranting.

Averagejoe, answer this question, and at least we'll know what your priorities are: Would you rather buy an iPad for $499 or a Windows RT tablet for $499, assuming the BOM of the two tablets is identical, and tell us why you would buy the one you choose.
 
That has nothing to do with it is not what he was talking about,he is trying to imply that on hardware you get charge for access to content,that is not right at all.

He is right. What does purchasing a console provides? The ability to access the console's services and library. In fact consoles offer very utility outside those services and library as who wants to spend $300 a DVD or BluRay player nowadays or services that could be provided by a $99 product.

You get charge for the hardware,the software is charge to you apart,it has been like this since consoles started,and i don't think netflix or hulu,can increase the cost of a console,that is silly every one get those apps for free every where.

The software is still charged apart

The xbox getting cable providers will mean nothing,since i am 100% sure cable companies will charge you for it or MS.

Working with cable companies can mean alot of different things as using the xfinity app on the 360 doesn't count against your data cap on comcast. The leaks show that MS wanted or wants to launch a paid TV service with its own content. MS and cable companies may come to an arrangement where TV service or gaming data in general doesn't count against your data cap (which would be a big plus for any download heavy service) in an exchange for a portion of the subscription fees that revolve around Live and XTV.

You are basically making assumptions without any real concrete knowledge about what Durango offers. All the rumors and outside leaks may just revolve around an application apu. The leak MS document showed MS was planning to provide a lot more than an APU for gaming. They wanted to supply every Durango gamer with 360 BC.

That implication alone could mean alot more than we have considered. A previous console's library is basically thrown away every new generation because it is not really considered of any real value outside a fraction of the userbase willing to make use of it. However, the average attachment rate on consoles doesn't even represent 1% of the games offered by your typical console's library. Your average gamer never makes any real use of the library offered by their hardware. And thats probably due to the retail model of software offered on consoles.

Digital download and a different pay model may alleviate that perceived lack of value. What if MS offers BC in every console and a Netflix like subscription model for the 360 library? You pay a subscription fee in return you get access the whole 360 library. You could even find a circumstance where current gen games find a new life with a subscription based offering when retail sales die off. Do you see people complain about the lack of a strong presence of a used DVD/BluRay market? Thats because movies and TV series come with a tiered price structure. Something the game market truly lacks.

MS is definitely pushing towards a subscription model as its a more stable model that is typically more profitable but in exchange has to offer more value. Unlocking the untapped value of past libraries could prove to be a source of value addition. Another could be a different profit structure as the current one is relatively archaic. As the amount of bandwidth improves and data caps grow or are totally lifted, gaming has a chance to adopt a model more synonymous to TV and film. Where gamers traditionally purchase newly released titles but older titles and "straight to Live" titles are handled by a subscription model. A third tier could be a free to pay model based on ads.

The console ecosystem of today looks nothing like it did 10 years ago. And MS has been a big part of the evolution we have seen over that decade. Large memory storage, centralized online service, achievements and a host of other features offered on Xbox consoles have become standards across console hardware. Given that, you expect MS to rest on it laurels and use its current dominating position of third in a three horse race and simply start ripping people off. Offering a similar product to last gen at a price that was easily reject last gen in an effort to make a subscription model attractive. A $500 dollar Durango doesnt make a $300 price point tied to a subscription attractive. $300 is a current price point that currently buys ownership of the hardware.

Smartphone is the biggest and hottest market right now. Telcom get away with things other markets could never do like selling you 5 GBs worth of bandwidth for $50. Do you think ATT could start selling unlocked iphones at $1350 and offering subsidized $400 iphones with $250 a month contracts with no ramifications? All while Verizon and others maintain the current pricing. Tell me why anybody would accept the such a thing from a console? Especially with Sony basically offering the same product under more economically friendly circumstances.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That has nothing to do with it is not what he was talking about,he is trying to imply that on hardware you get charge for access to content,that is not right at all.

You get charge for the hardware,the software is charge to you apart,it has been like this since consoles started,and i don't think netflix or hulu,can increase the cost of a console,that is silly every one get those apps for free every where.

The xbox getting cable providers will mean nothing,since i am 100% sure cable companies will charge you for it or MS.

Well its what your trying to say isnt it? I mean you think the only thing to take into consideration is th BOM when costing a console. .its ridiculous to say the least.

What abut R&D? marketing? Publisher deals? Operating system? Servers? Apps? Development tools? Market analysis? Hardware testing? Software testing?..likely many more.

All these things play a massive role in costing a product and the overall end user experience...ie percieved value for money....percieved value for money will likely have nothing in common with BOM.

Edit: that is not including the actual games them self which is the only part of not BOM you appear to accept.
 
I fully agree with Averagejoe here. Microsoft pricing and xbox live especially is something I never understood. It is like if you want to game on PC get alienware or gaming laptop, which makes no sense whatsoever. It will be intresting to know how they go about 720 though. May 21st they will probably just show the box nothing else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top