News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[Rangers]

I think it makes a ton of sense too. A roku style box, but with Xbox gaming branding and heritage (for playing app games not core games of course) could probably do a lot. Throw in all MS growing TV and content deals. Roku goes for as little as 50 unsubsidized, I bet MS could do something for 39 and that'd fly off the shelves.

Big possible competition would be smart TV's though.

MSnerd seems to be the only one talking about it though, and if it was launching in 13 we'd probably need to know more by now.

 

[GuestLV]

if you aren't impressed with Batman or BF3 as it looks today on a good pc, then I suspect a 2012/2013 console will dissapoint you. A 2014 console though would be a different matter, but damn that's a long wait! !

Im just speaking about reasons to move on Win PC right now (only for me of course),not about overall game impressions. I have a decent PC setup (with 360 wired gamepad), to check this games in full DX11''glory'' options enabled ,with good frame rate etc,and of course I play(and will play) Diablo and Starcraft on PC ,but sorry I can not find much reasons to abandon my old x360. At now I see, only Samaritan level can ''push me'' spend money on next gen stuff ,if not, sorry again ''they will not see money'' from me

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I imagine the PC-educated console gamer thought process is something along the lines of increasingly wanting an improved experience as their consoles get older, but expecting the new consoles to come out 'next year' and so it's not worth investing in a PC. This gen has seen 'next year' be pushed and pushed, but it'd be daft of me to think about buying a PC (like many I use a laptop now for computing) when the probability of new consoles is only increasing. Thus I very much doubt many will jump to PC gaming. Those who already ahve experience of Pc gaming and move between that and consoles will make the switch, but most won't.

 

[mrcorbo]

I imagine the PC-educated console gamer thought process is something along the lines of increasingly wanting an improved experience as their consoles get older, but expecting the new consoles to come out 'next year' and so it's not worth investing in a PC. This gen has seen 'next year' be pushed and pushed, but it'd be daft of me to think about buying a PC (like many I use a laptop now for computing) when the probability of new consoles is only increasing. Thus I very much doubt many will jump to PC gaming. Those who already ahve experience of Pc gaming and move between that and consoles will make the switch, but most won't.

The ability for a gaming PC to evolve and expand makes it a very different kind of purchase than a console, though.

A gamer purchasing a new console has an expectation that their gaming experience will improve over the time they own it as developers learn to better exploit the hardware available to them. Additionally, as of this last generation, a gamer can expect additional software and services will be added over the life of the console to add to the capabilities of the system they bought.

The PC-educated gamer, though, when purchasing a PC should not only consider what the system is capable of at purchase, but how the system can be upgraded to improve those capabilities in the future. Some will choose to make continual large investments to perpetually keep their system top-of-the-line. There is an alternate approach, though, where you try to find the price/performance sweet-spot with each upgrade. If you're thoughtful about what upgrades you make, and when you make them, you can keep a gaming PC at a reasonable level of performance with occasional relatively modest investments. That "reasonable" level of performance will, for longer periods than not, exceed the capabilities of any console available. And you also gain the additional capabilities that having a relatively powerful PC bring. I know this wouldn't be an appealing option for everyone, maybe not even for most, but I think you need to think of the PC in this way to properly evaluate it. The modularity and expandability of the PC give the owner the ability to directly control the pace and direction of how their gaming system is improved and this is a key differentiator of the platform.

 

[joker454]

I imagine the PC-educated console gamer thought process is something along the lines of increasingly wanting an improved experience as their consoles get older, but expecting the new consoles to come out 'next year' and so it's not worth investing in a PC. This gen has seen 'next year' be pushed and pushed, but it'd be daft of me to think about buying a PC (like many I use a laptop now for computing) when the probability of new consoles is only increasing. Thus I very much doubt many will jump to PC gaming. Those who already ahve experience of Pc gaming and move between that and consoles will make the switch, but most won't.

Thing is, why would they not just keep pushing next gen back to 2012, 2013, 2014, etc? You guys are all happy with the level of graphics current console hardware provides and you won't go to pc, so why wouldn't Microsoft and Sony just keep delaying for years and years milking as much profit as they can from their current old hardware? You guys will keep spending on the current consoles anyways, so need for them to be upgraded. You are probably right, most won't make the switch, but then people need to not act surprised when they see no new hardware coming out anytime soon because y'all are telling them exactly that, to basically not release anything new because you are happy with current offerings.

 

[manux]

Thing is, why would they not just keep pushing next gen back to 2012, 2013, 2014, etc? You guys are all happy with the level of graphics current console hardware provides and you won't go to pc, so why wouldn't Microsoft and Sony just keep delaying for years and years milking as much profit as they can from their current old hardware? You guys will keep spending on the current consoles anyways, so need for them to be upgraded. You are probably right, most won't make the switch, but then people need to not act surprised when they see no new hardware coming out anytime soon because y'all are telling them exactly that, to basically not release anything new because you are happy with current offerings.

Or perhaps for many(like me) the issue is that pretty graphics just doesn't make a better Game. A lot of the franchises/games are way too recycled and that has been my biggest gripe in transition from last gen to current gen. Same games, prettier graphics(same shooter, same fifa, same insert X).

I think sony got burnt more on the recycled stuff because people played many series on ps1+ps2(like wipeout, tekken, etc) and just didn't care for them anymore. I bet ms will see similar decline in some of the franchises when people realize, hey I have alreay played this same shit with same mechanics 10 years ago and to death(assuming the pattern still is, lets put pretty graphics and leave other stuff nearly as is)

For me gaming in "big platforms" has gone down to those few different games like little big planet, heavy rain etc.

I wouldn't ugrade because of graphics to pc. If there was compelling enough games I would jump because of the Games. The same goes for ps4/xbox720. If they offer only the same yet prettier I won't bother.

 

[manux]

Ivy bridge+kepler laptops just might revive pc gaming assuming people actually buy the games instead of pirating.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thing is, why would they not just keep pushing next gen back to 2012, 2013, 2014, etc?

1) Competition. If MS or Sony keeps pushing back their release date, the other can come along with a next-gen experience and clean up. Hell, Apple will eventually overtake if there's no new hardware.

2) Once these platforms have been exhausted, we'll give up on them and do something else. Technology has an inherent life-span. Consoles can be extended from a lack of active players, but eventually we'll get tired of the same old experiences. People always do.

I'm not saying being content is the best option, but it's why jumping to PC doesn't happen en masse. I'm not going to jump to PC now at a cost of £600+ or whatever it'd be to get a minimum new machine to play the current console games at better IQ as that'll mean I'll be £600 off buying the next console. Without justification to get a PC for other reasons, getting it just for games makes it relatively expensive.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Why I should do that?For tesselated walls in Crisys2 or Batman AA, or for 1080p and 60fps(without gamepad) in ME3?Not enough reason for me. What I will find on PC platform?same games builded for consoles with 512Ram in mind, with some DX extensions. I feel more comfortable to play with gamepad on big TV screen ,without windows shortcuts,and wait when Samaritan level graphics will come on my TV

I thought we'd moved past these falsehoods years ago. I'm disappointed to see some people are still trying to peddle them.

There is absolutely no difference between PC and Xbox 360 games with regards to controls. Both can use the 360 control pad and both share the exact same control scheme. The only difference is that where it makes more sense you can use the key board and mouse if you prefer with the PC.

Similarly there's absolutely nothing stopping any PC gamer from gaming on a big screen TV from whichever room they choose. All PC's these days are capable of at least dual outputs (for monitor and TV) or you can just plug direct into the TV only if you wish. Coupled with gamepad support, that makes it every bit as feasible to play games from the couch on the TV on PC as it is on console. This is quite simply an imaginary restriction.

I'm also not quite sure what the comment about Windows shortcuts even means? In what way is it more inconvenient to launch a game by clicking on a shortcut compared to putting a physical disk in a drive?

At the end of the day it's not about which solution is better than the other, it's about individual preferences. Some would prefer a fixed platform that gets better through software improvement and the simplicity of a console model while others see that same simplicity and fixed hardware as a disadvantage. Neither sides right or wrong.

Personally I'm seriously considering picking up a new xbox when it launches for the Kinect side of things while high end gaming will likely remain with the PC. For the same reasons as Joker though I'd be happy to wait at least a couple more years before seeing the next console launch. That said though, if they end up being relatively weaker compared with PC's than past generation consoles as current speculation suggests, and given they will likely be targeting the same resolution as PC's so the resolution performance advantage will be gone, then it's possible that PC's will have that noticeable visual quality improvement much faster next generation than they did this.

 

[egoless]

Delete

 

[pjbliverpool]

The falsehoods you mention are probably intended as catch alls. Like the difference between sitting in front of a monitor or the 10ft experience. They are terms used as catch alls.

So when somebody says gamepad, they're saying they like putting in a game, pressing A on the inevitable few seconds update, sitting through an install if they choose to, then starting their game. They are saying IHV affinity is taken care of because it's between console A and console B, not nvidia options vs amd options. The driver dance is taken care of. The excel spreadsheet menus and hud are taken care of. The few crown jewel mods in a sea of crap is taken care of. Maximizing existing hardware is taken care of and everybody is on the exact same playing field. Online is taken care of without intervention from web browsers, different launcher front-ends, and so on.

I'd argue most of those when put into perspective of how things actually work on a modern PC are not discernible advantages either (in fact some can be argued as disadvantages). But this isn't the thread for it.

 

[SedentaryJourney]

The PC-educated gamer, though, when purchasing a PC should not only consider what the system is capable of at purchase, but how the system can be upgraded to improve those capabilities in the future. Some will choose to make continual large investments to perpetually keep their system top-of-the-line. There is an alternate approach, though, where you try to find the price/performance sweet-spot with each upgrade. If you're thoughtful about what upgrades you make, and when you make them, you can keep a gaming PC at a reasonable level of performance with occasional relatively modest investments. That "reasonable" level of performance will, for longer periods than not, exceed the capabilities of any console available. And you also gain the additional capabilities that having a relatively powerful PC bring. I know this wouldn't be an appealing option for everyone, maybe not even for most, but I think you need to think of the PC in this way to properly evaluate it. The modularity and expandability of the PC give the owner the ability to directly control the pace and direction of how their gaming system is improved and this is a key differentiator of the platform.

The thing is even if I decided to throw in with the hobbyist gaming rig camp, I'd still probably end up buying a console or consoles. As a gamer I think it's a lot easier to go console only rather than PC only. I guess Blizzard is the only holdout as far as PC exclusive content is concerned, though probably not for long, and I still have my Mac for the odd indie game.

I think PC gaming is more of a hobby or niche, like car tuning, than it is a mass gaming platform. By this I'm referring to high end games, as opposed to browser-based gaming, which you don't need much of a PC for. It's something you invest time and money into in exchange for a qualitatively better experience. Being a niche market though, you put up with lack of publisher interest.

Thing is, why would they not just keep pushing next gen back to 2012, 2013, 2014, etc? You guys are all happy with the level of graphics current console hardware provides and you won't go to pc, so why wouldn't Microsoft and Sony just keep delaying for years and years milking as much profit as they can from their current old hardware?

I think we all expect new consoles soon, and this expectation is playing against transitioning to PC gaming. Certainly if it's perpetually delayed and developers start delivering a next gen gaming experience on PC then MS and Sony should worry about the core market migrating away. Crysis 2, BF3, and Arkahm City don't quite sit on the other side of that generational threshold.

Getting back to the next Xbox, to me it's looking like they'll follow a similar schedule to the 360. Official unveiling May 2013, launch in November.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I think PC gaming is more of a hobby or niche, like car tuning, than it is a mass gaming platform. By this I'm referring to high end games, as opposed to browser-based gaming, which you don't need much of a PC for. It's something you invest time and money into in exchange for a qualitatively better experience. Being a niche market though, you put up with lack of publisher interest.

Yes agree 100%.

 

[blip]

They won't call it the 720, wish everybody would stop saying that.

720 is an old sounding number because it reminds of 720p, when 1080p is the full standard now.

 

[Rangers]

They won't call it the 720, wish everybody would stop saying that.

720 is an old sounding number because it reminds of 720p, when 1080p is the full standard now.

ehh, it's just a name we use for now. dont think anybody really expects it to be called that.

though i guess technically we should just start calling it durango.

honestly though now that i think of it you're right. i wouldn't be shocked if they call it xbox 1080 at retail, especially assuming 1080p is target res.

or they might as well pull an apple and just start calling it "xbox", retro style

 

[tuna]

Maybe Xbox 4K is better

 

[mrcorbo]

The thing is even if I decided to throw in with the hobbyist gaming rig camp, I'd still probably end up buying a console or consoles. As a gamer I think it's a lot easier to go console only rather than PC only. I guess Blizzard is the only holdout as far as PC exclusive content is concerned, though probably not for long, and I still have my Mac for the odd indie game.

I have a gaming PC, a 360 and a PS3 (though the PS3 was purchased only because I got it for $200). I certainly see the appeal of owning a console. Multiplayer gaming, in general, is something I much prefer on console and local multiplayer is pretty much a console exclusive.

I think PC gaming is more of a hobby or niche, like car tuning, than it is a mass gaming platform. By this I'm referring to high end games, as opposed to browser-based gaming, which you don't need much of a PC for. It's something you invest time and money into in exchange for a qualitatively better experience. Being a niche market though, you put up with lack of publisher interest.

I don't agree with your assessment. While there aren't many big-budget PC exclusives, almost all big-budget multiplatform releases have a PC version. This hardly shows a lack of publisher interest. According to Metacritic six of the top ten reviewed games from 2011 for both the 360 and PS3 were multiplatform releases that were also released on PC.

I would also add that the combination of virtually unlimited storage and the PC platform's good (if not always easily achieved) backward compatibility mean that I can expect that my PC games are going to remain immediately available to me indefinitely. Add that to the ridiculous sales that regularly occur and I think each of these purchases has more value than those I make for my consoles.

 

[SedentaryJourney]

I don't agree with your assessment. While there aren't many big-budget PC exclusives, almost all big-budget multiplatform releases have a PC version. This hardly shows a lack of publisher interest. According to Metacritic six of the top ten reviewed games from 2011 for both the 360 and PS3 were multiplatform releases that were also released on PC.

Certainly PC is still a supported platform, I just believe publishers aren't as keen on the PC as they used to be. Before, games like Crysis, Far Cry, and Doom 3 were developed exclusively for the PC and then perhaps you'd get a ported down or reworked console version at a later date. I'm not sure any major publisher these days would accept a new Crysis, Far Cry, or Doom that didn't lead with a console version.

Also, Japanese support for the PC sucks. Capcom does okay with PC ports a few months after the console release but everyone else gets an F.

 

[ERP]

Certainly PC is still a supported platform, I just believe publishers aren't as keen on the PC as they used to be. Before, games like Crysis, Far Cry, and Doom 3 were developed exclusively for the PC and then perhaps you'd get a ported down or reworked console version at a later date. I'm not sure any major publisher these days would accept a new Crysis, Far Cry, or Doom that didn't lead with a console version.

Also, Japanese support for the PC sucks. Capcom does okay with PC ports a few months after the console release but everyone else gets an F.

The question isn't PC support it's whether the high end PC market space can justify development as a primary SKU, or at least the investment to exploit the hardware.
I think there are still a few titles that in my mind led on PC Crysis, Far Cry, Doom, and I'd count Skyrim (even with the compromised interface).
It would be a hard sell for a developer outside of that relatively narrow set to get funding for a AAA game led of PC.

The PC space can be very lucrative for a publisher, if they can move the units, currently however it's pretty rare to move enough on PC alone to justify the investment.

 

[wco81]

MS seems to be proud of this milestone:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...ular-than-multiplayer-gaming-on-xbox-live.ars

If this trend continues, it can't augur well for "core" gaming. When iOS and Android are selling devices in volumes that has to make console manufacturers envious and moving a lot of software for those devices, including games and entertainment software, and then consoles become conduits for "general entertainment," then they are intruding into each other's markets.