News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[shiznit]

never mind, misunderstood the color blind comments.

 

[expletive]

I hope you're right. The console with the best indie and small dev library is probably where I'll go. That's starting to be more in-line with my playing habits.

The virtualization rumors we've heard about might make it easier for them to be more open with Indie and Small Devs. My thought is that using virtualization they can more easily protect the rest of the system from poor code and overall stability issues which may allow them to be more lenient/agile with the certification process for these types of titles. I'm not a dev but the negative themes i keep hearing about the Xbox certification cycle is that its time consuming and expensive, virtualization may be able to help alleviate that.

EDIT:I would guess it can also can make code more portable from the surface RT/WP8 devices?

 

[3dilettante]

The VM implementation comparison will be interesting. Having a hypervisor-protected domain is part of current gen platforms, but this may be expanded to cover the whole system to avoid an OtherOS-type scenario.
(edit: Well, it would try to.)

 

[Prophecy2k]

Once both hardwares are (not) revealed, we can have two comparison threads - technical and business. All comparison on B3D can be contained in those places, and everyone who's sick of the constant bickering can just ignore them and live a much happier, more fruitful life.

But admit it Shifty, you know you won't be able to resist dipping into those threads every now and again

Guilty pleasures and all that lol

 

[blakjedi]

I expect that the main thing today is "developers, developers, developers". I think they will go all in with the "open" store model (similar to Windows 8 and Windows Phone) and that they will announce stuff like support for Unity. I see this as the first major console which will target the indie developers in addition to the big studios.

I also suspect that the "apps on TV" will be the next big thing and Microsoft are in a great position to take a dominant position on that market.

yeah.. unity has been made free for WP8 developers with under 100K in revenues last fiscal.

 

[blakjedi]

The virtualization rumors we've heard about might make it easier for them to be more open with Indie and Small Devs. My thought is that using virtualization they can more easily protect the rest of the system from poor code and overall stability issues which may allow them to be more lenient/agile with the certification process for these types of titles. I'm not a dev but the negative themes i keep hearing about the Xbox certification cycle is that its time consuming and expensive, virtualization may be able to help alleviate that.

EDIT:I would guess it can also can make code more portable from the surface RT/WP8 devices?

I agree. here is what I envision:

To go with the convergence idea, I think MS is going to try to keep developers away from the lowest levels of the hardware and push them at all costs to develop for a WinRT based api abstracted to a hypervisor.

This gives MS two capabilities: 1) as long as the underlying hardware can support a hypervisor, the platform can run any xbox next game, and 2) VMMs can run in the cloud making devices that cannot support the hypervisor able to play THE SAME GAME as long as the connection is fast and stable…

Have a surface RT? You can still play the Halo game you bought for xbox. Just plug in an xbox controller and connect to Live… Have a PC? Just connect to live and download the VMM that the xbox saved after the last time you played it…

This capability is pretty much the ultimate megaton and the holy grail of game convergence. HW matters less and they will have pretty much destroyed the HW cycle which Nintendo and Sony have dominated for the last three decades.

At least that’s what I imagine MS wants to do. We will see

 

[3dilettante]

This gives MS two capabilities: 1) as long as the underlying hardware can support a hypervisor, the platform can run any xbox next game, and

Supporting a hypervisor is a very common feature. It would be a very thick API and intrusive virtualization scheme to insulate software entirely from an undefined hardware implementation.

It would be simpler for forward and cross compatibility, where the hardware is designed with supporting the VM's defined feature set and performance guarantees in mind.

2) VMMs can run in the cloud making devices that cannot support the hypervisor able to play THE SAME GAME as long as the connection is fast and stable…

Could you outline the differences with what currently happens? Remote gaming servers can already virtualize per client, at least with the latest hardware.

 

[blakjedi]

Supporting a hypervisor is a very common feature. It would be a very thick API and intrusive virtualization scheme to insulate software entirely from an undefined hardware implementation.

It would be simpler for forward and cross compatibility, where the hardware is designed with supporting the VM's defined feature set and performance guarantees in mind.


Could you outline the differences with what currently happens? Remote gaming servers can already virtualize per client, at least with the latest hardware.

Sorry. I was relating this entire capability to WinRT based platforms. So a Hyper-V implementation (which happens comes built in to Windows 8) - I'm not sure about the Windows RT variant would be the beneficiary.

Bare metal hypervisors (if I remember my VMware studies) are very lightweight so I do not think the xbox next OS and api would be very "thick" at all. I also think this implementation is where 360s current catalogue is moving to also thus the ability to have and 360 SOC thin client device run games from that catalogue with no drive.

The "save state" capability of VMMs is necessarily what they are aiming for on this platform imho. Which is radically different from say the PS3 where you cannot leave a game to do any system functions whatsoever without quitting the game.

I look forward to a full expose of windows blue to see what hooks MS includes to enable a capability like this (or not).

 

[messyman]

I'm already seeing some CoD Ghosts ads.
Graphically, it doesn't look all that different from past CoDs tho.

 

[Rangers]

I'm already seeing some CoD Ghosts ads.
Graphically, it doesn't look all that different from past CoDs tho.

hopefully current gen footage

 

[messyman]

And if the ads are any indications, the next Xbox will be called

Spoiler

XBOX

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

kinect 2.0 seems to be not built into the console. it's a separate attachment.

 

[BRiT]

Kinect 2.0 is included with every Xbox One console.

BTW: I call dibs on the "XBone" name.

 

[oramay]

Kinect 2.0 is included with every Xbox One console.

BTW: I call dibs on the "XBone" name.

Haha, nice. I prefer X-Bone though.

 

[3dilettante]

Crap.
Well, I'll call dibs on the sequel consoles.
XBox OneOne
Xbox OneOneOne

 

[BRiT]

Xbox Tu
Xbox TuTu

 

[COPS N RAPPERS]

the specs were kept on a tight leash, 8 cpu cores and 8 gbs of memory, no gpu was listed or the speeds of any of their tech. in relation to gaming, physics and AI were mentioned along with the announcement of 15 unannounced exclusives.

 

[Rangers]

the specs were kept on a tight leash, 8 cpu cores and 8 gbs of memory, no gpu was listed or the speeds of any of their tech. in relation to gaming, physics and AI were mentioned along with the announcement of 15 unannounced exclusives.

yeah, as long as no speeds were mentioned for all we know they were upped.

maybe we'll get some of that details at various post shows.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

MS has confirmed that used games , if played on a second system, will need to be reactivated by paying a fee. So, they ARE blocking used games. No wonder EA dropped online pass, they don't need it anymore. MS is doing it for them on all games.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/407912/microsoft-confirms-pre-owned-fee-for-xbox-one/

Mandatory game installation required for all games; Paywall prevents second install on separate Live account



Microsoft has confirmed that all Xbox One games will require mandatory installation onto the system's hard drive and, to install the same disc onto another user's drive, a fee must be paid.



Individual games will be tied to Xbox Live accounts, Microsoft said, meaning that the software giant can detect whether a game has been sold to a retailer and repurchased, or handed from one friend to another. In such instances, the second user must pay a fee.



"On the new Xbox, all game discs are installed to the HDD to play," a Microsoft representative told Wired.



The company added that, once discs are installed on the hard drive, games can be played without a disc being in the tray.



The Wired article then elaborates: "What follows naturally from this is that each disc would have to be tied to a unique Xbox Live account, else you could take a single disc and pass it between everyone you know and copy the game over and over. Since this is clearly not going to happen, each disc must then only install for a single owner."



It added: "Microsoft did say that if a disc was used with a second account, that owner would be given the option to pay a fee and install the game from the disc, which would then mean that the new account would also own the game and could play it without the disc."



Microsoft did not disclose what the second-user fee would amount too, and did not clarify further on the matter.



The article claims that there is no sweeping 'always-online' requirement for future Xbox One games.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

There's a website claiming BC is out ! No Backward compatibility either!

Hmmm...paid online, TV stuff I can't use, blocked used games, no BC either. Why should I buy this? I really wanted to change after PS2 and 3 , but this is getting difficult.