News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[RancidLunchmeat]

PS4 uses a totally different API called GNM.

Seriously? Like back in the day when 3dfx used glide instead of DX?

For some reason, after 3dfx died I thought everybody just migrated to the DX solution. Why would Sony have developed their own API when the hardware they're using is already DX compliant and essentially built for that purpose? I mean, I imagine there's a benefit?

 

[Scott_Arm]

Seriously? Like back in the day when 3dfx used glide instead of DX?

For some reason, after 3dfx died I thought everybody just migrated to the DX solution. Why would Sony have developed their own API when the hardware they're using is already DX compliant and essentially built for that purpose? I mean, I imagine there's a benefit?

You can't run DirectX unless you run the windows kernel and the directx runtime. That's why Linux, iOS, Android use OpenGL. Playstation 1,2,3 and 4 are all running custom APIs.

As for benefits, Directx11 and previous were high-level APIs. Xbox 360 and Xbox One both run custom versions of D3D to get better performance. Playstation 4s API, GNM, should be very low-level, flexible and performant. Much (or all) of what's in D3D12 is probably already doable in GNM.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

DirectX is a MS API - they're not going to let Sony use it! It's also not a console specific API. XB360 used a lite version. DX has too much overhead to be of value to a closed-hardware console platform.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Why would Sony have developed their own API when the hardware they're using is already DX compliant and essentially built for that purpose? I mean, I imagine there's a benefit?

You could start by reading Digital Foundry's interview with 4A games after they finished Metro Redux.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

You can't run DirectX unless you run the windows kernel and the directx runtime. That's why Linux, iOS, Android use OpenGL. Playstation 1,2,3 and 4 are all running custom APIs.

As for benefits, Directx11 and previous were high-level APIs. Xbox 360 and Xbox One both run custom versions of D3D to get better performance. Playstation 4s API, GNM, should be very low-level, flexible and performant. Much (or all) of what's in D3D12 is probably already doable in GNM.

Thanks for the explanation, Scott.

You could start by reading Digital Foundry's interview with 4A games after they finished Metro Redux.

Cool, I'll read the link, thanks Soup.

[edit] Link is broken, I'll try to google it.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Link is broken, I'll try to google it.

Sorry, fixed it.

 

[iroboto]

You can't run DirectX unless you run the windows kernel and the directx runtime. That's why Linux, iOS, Android use OpenGL. Playstation 1,2,3 and 4 are all running custom APIs.

As for benefits, Directx11 and previous were high-level APIs. Xbox 360 and Xbox One both run custom versions of D3D to get better performance. Playstation 4s API, GNM, should be very low-level, flexible and performant. Much (or all) of what's in D3D12 is probably already doable in GNM.

I'd imagine that if GNM is not capable of these features, and Sony wanted them, they would either develop them into GNM themselves or invest the effort to on-boarding Vulcan; whatever decision would serve them most beneficially.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There's a whole discussion on DX12 and it's impact on consoles (including PS4). No need to hold it in the XB1 Rumours thread.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

[Message deleted per Shifty's earlier post.]

 

[AzBat]

As far as not requiring a subscription to Live for PC multiplayer, no.. they couldn't possibly get away with that yet. But I'm willing to bet that if you want to use crossplay, you're going to need a Live subscription. I'm also willing to bet (a little bit less) that those Xbox exclusives that will be made available on the PC will also require a Live subscription for multiplayer, even on the PC.

I'm still not sure if I wasn't clear or you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was saying that MS couldn't get away with charging for PC multiplayer, PC players would have a fit. This was my first statement about MS possibly charging for PC multiplayer:

I misinterpreted it because of the bolded part quoted above. I read it as: Microsoft couldn't get away with "not requiring a subscription".

Your link doesn't address crossplay, it also doesn't address exclusives that might require Gold subscriptions on PC regardless of any multiplayer aspect.

That's true. That was my intent. I provided those links to dispute what I thought was your position that Microsoft was going to charge for PC multiplayer. I was not trying to dispute your position on cross-play or exclusives. You are correct, Microsoft comments in those links don't address cross-play or their own exclusives. In fact, they have not said anything specifically about how they will bring Gold to the PC. Neither the Windows 10 event or GDC are the right place or time for them to talk about consumer features and pricing. Usually E3 is when & where they do that.

You stated that you believe they won't require a subscription for crossplay or for any formerly Xb1 exclusive, "After what they've said now."

Actually no. That comment was not for cross-play or exclusives. It was only for charging for PC multiplayer.

With that behind us, I still disagree with your Gold required for cross-play & exclusives idea though, but not because of anything MS has said(no links to provide). I just think it would go against the spirit of their position of not charging PC players for multiplayer. I think they will provide Gold features to the PC, but it will be probably be things like Games with Gold or Deals with Gold. PC gamers don't care who they are playing with or against. And also don't care if it's a Microsoft 1st party or exclusive. Games are games & players are players. And they're not paying for any of that. They may pay for dedicated servers, but I doubt more than a few bucks.

Tommy McClain

 

[shredenvain]

Probably because many people with PC's don't have one powerful enough to run the latest games? Or even last gen games? But are good enough to take a video stream?

You can easily play a streamed game on a modern Atom tablet, but certainly not run a modern game.

Regards,
SB

This is a great answer SB. Still the fact stands that there has been no announcement of Xbox One exclusive titles all being available on your Windows 10 device natively. This is the point I was trying to get across. MS has more incentive to keep certain titles Xbox One exclusive (newest Halo's, Gears of War) because it will help push consoles.
The streaming of Xbox one games will still allow them to say that you can play your games across MS devices while not actually selling these exclusives on the PC side. They may even make major exclusives timed like with the original halo and halo 2 that released on PC a few years after their Xbox launches. I would also like to touch on the subject of the perception that non B3D user don't have the ability to assemble a cheap gaming PC with a 1 to 2 teraflop gpu. You can even go into big box stores and purchase low to mid gaming PCs with this much power for $500 to $600 dollars. Not to mention the oncoming slew of steam machines coming that can easily run windows 10 as well as having the power to run Xbox One games. Sure some people will see consoles as the easy entry into Xbox gaming, but others will do a little research and find that a $500 steam machine would allow them to play every Xbox One title (hypothetically) and allow them to do office work, home work, and even things like Pro Tools and Photo shop.
That is why in my opinion they aren't going to just release all of Xbox One's future and past titles including exclusives to anyone that can manufactor a PC. Plus in a years time GPUs with 1.5 tflop plus power will be a lot more common place and affordable. On top of that if they hold up to their word and don't charge for Win10 multiplayer they would be giving away all the work they have put into the Xbox One console and it's online ecosystem for free to PC gamers. Thus I believe since crossplay and crossbuy will be up to the developer and publishers you will not see every title released in the future on the Xbox One be available for native play on your PC. That is why Ms would add game streaming from the console to the PC so they could cover the bases without giving away every console exclusive or forcing 2nd and 3rd party developers into crossbuy or crossplay.

 

[NRP]

This sounds great. I hope MS kills the XBox hardware, if only to kill the stupid console wars. I really like the idea of playing MS published games on any device. I really couldn't care less what the game is running on.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

An interesting possibility with cross buy is scale-able console games. It actually lends some credence to MS being able to release a more powerful XBO (XBO^2?) in the future. And then games can scale (like a PC) depending on how much performance is available on the machine. Except instead of custom graphics options like users would toy with on PC. A developer can just code in custom settings that are automatically applied depending on what machine it is being run on.

So Gen1 runs the game as it would if no new machine that is more powerful was ever released. Gen2 runs the game with more options available or resolution (developer gets to choose). Or to put it another way game targetting Gen2 would run at targetted specs, while Gen1 gets reduced options enabled. Upgrade console from gen1 to gen3 and your entire digital library still works...potentially with better visuals than it did on the gen1 machine the game released on.

Presumably if there's a PC version of the game releasing simultaneously there isn't even much work the developer would have to do to enable that.

I don't like the idea from a pure console POV. You buy a console it should play the game at its best for the life of the console generation. But with Microsoft seemingly hellbent on blurring the distinction between the XBO and a Windows 10 device (apparently their holy grail is all devices are Windows X devices - console, PC, phone, tablet, etc.), it does seem to be a potentially logical extension of that. After all there's a new Surface tablet released each year, a new Windows Phone released each year, etc.

But again, I don't like the thought of that and I hope they don't do it. IMO, a person shouldn't have to make the decision about whether to buy a new console every 1-2 years as they sometimes do with smartphones.

Regards,
SB

 

[shredenvain]

This sounds great. I hope MS kills the XBox hardware, if only to kill the stupid console wars. I really like the idea of playing MS published games on any device. I really couldn't care less what the game is running on.

That's great and your opinion, but it doesn't have anything to do with the console wars. Microsoft getting out of pure consoles won't end sh!t. You still have Sony and Nintendo whose followers will go at it. Xbox didnt exist during one of the most memorable console wars between the genesis and SNES. Console wars dont have to be participated in to begin with. I guess I am just old school as far as consoles go as I enjoy there being multiple companies having systems that have exclusive titles that make each system important and special. The problem with this newest gen console war wise is the insufferable A-holes they fill the internet willing to say anything no matter how negative to win an argument about their systems. This generation just started and is setting records in sales and people want it to go away?

 

[NRP]

You seem to be too in love with the physical hardware. No one in this thread wants game development and user experience development to end. We just want choice and convenience. As long as the UI and input mechanisms are consistent (and good), and online MP is balanced, then who cares what hardware is under the hood?

Look where this generation's hardware went - absolutely low end crap. It's just a business reality that consoles can't continue to be loss leaders, so they will never again pack cutting edge hardware. Why not break that cycle completely and give users the choice of what they want in terms of performance, features, and graphical capabilities?

 

[Rurouni]

The advantage of console isn't necessary about the computing power but more on uniform experience and guaranteed hardware stability for at least the generation of the said hardware (stability as in the same spec). I'm not as sure as a lot of people in this forum that thinks this development will be good for consumer. I definitely have my doubts. I'm hoping the end result of this Xbox thing on PC will be good, but I have some thought in my head about how all of this could actually hurt gaming overall.

 

[Nesh]

You seem to be too in love with the physical hardware. No one in this thread wants game development and user experience development to end. We just want choice and convenience. As long as the UI and input mechanisms are consistent (and good), and online MP is balanced, then who cares what hardware is under the hood?

Look where this generation's hardware went - absolutely low end crap. It's just a business reality that consoles can't continue to be loss leaders, so they will never again pack cutting edge hardware. Why not break that cycle completely and give users the choice of what they want in terms of performance, features, and graphical capabilities?

I understand choice and convenience but I think you ignore the competitive benefits brought by competing companies whether these are exclusive content or unique hardware features that are only found in the console space and not so much in the PC space.
Once everyone goes streaming only, most likely we would be getting streamable PC games by majority. We dont see large jumps in gaming experience until a new console launch hits the market even though PCs were already ready to produce a lot more advanced games.
Also what about having real choices as in, choice between console, PC or streaming games? or offline or online, or streamable or non streamable content?

 

[shredenvain]

You seem to be too in love with the physical hardware.

This made me laugh. It makes it sound like I am taking my Dreamcast to dinner and a movie and maybe back to her place afterwards for a night cap.

 

[orangpelupa]

I don't like the idea from a pure console POV. You buy a console it should play the game at its best for the life of the console generation. But with Microsoft seemingly hellbent on blurring the distinction between the XBO and a Windows 10 device (apparently their holy grail is all devices are Windows X devices - console, PC, phone, tablet, etc.), it does seem to be a potentially logical extension of that. After all there's a new Surface tablet released each year, a new Windows Phone released each year, etc.

But again, I don't like the thought of that and I hope they don't do it. IMO, a person shouldn't have to make the decision about whether to buy a new console every 1-2 years as they sometimes do with smartphones.

Regards,
SB

but if they do that, MS basically will have a wide range of price to offer to consumer. XB1-1 for the cheapest, XB1-2 at the same price as XB1-1 when launched. Just like lumia, you can buy cheaper lumia and still can enjoy the content/software features just like the uber expensive one (as long as you not buy the under 100 dollar lumias).

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Ars Technica are reporting that Microsoft are now throwing Halo The Master Chief Collection into the standard $349 package in the US and "other select markets". It's a download code rather than on disc but a great deal!