Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[RudeCurve]

Or, just use the 360 you ALREADY OWN since you own those games

That's the thing that makes BC such a non important thing imo. At BEST all you're saving is some room under your TV. Which, big deal. If you care so much about older titles that BC is so important, then you wont mind anyway.

I'm not saying it has zero advantages, the fact I can play all the Halo's to date on my 360 is pretty neat, and I've often though it would be cool if they released some sort of anthology of all the Halo titles (1, 2, 3, Reach, soon 4 and Remake, ODST and Wars)in a big boxed set, and it would be neat they'd all be playable on 360.

But really, that's more a novelty than anything. Sony has the right idea, just ditch BC. I have never ever understood the big deal. As I've said a million times it's always a trade off, people act like it's BC or nothing, but no the real proposition is BC or, something else that you give up because of the cost. Would you rather have had BC in those original 599 PS3, or an extra 256 RAM for likely similar cost? The answer is obvious.

I can see BC being a little more relevant to an extremely family friendly casual company like Nintendo. For some reason Joe Six Pack probably likes the idea of Wii U not "obsoleting" his Wii collection. Though again it's pretty dubious, since he ALREADY HAS A WII.

BTW I haven't thought about it, but how is BC expected to work on Wii U? If software BC is as bad as bkilian says, I'm guessing they just drop the Wii chipset in there?

You're missing the point. By having a BC module that is separate it doesn't add any cost to the console itself so no you won't be losing 256MB. I'd rather buy a $100 BC module and sell my Xbox for $150 than have a bunch of stupid consoles hooked up to the TV that only has X number of inputs.

 

[hoho]

I still do hope for BC on Sony's side. Even if it's some kind of bolt on module containing the PS3's innards. That would make me be an early adopter of the PS4 so i can sell of my PS3 quickly whilst it still has some value.

What about just allowing to plug PS3 AV output to PS4 and make PS4 to forward inputs from the new controllers to the old box? You'd only have one console directly connected to the TV and you can control the old one through PS4 without needing separate remotes.

 

[function]

Will your 360 suddenly mysteriously die when you buy a new console?

Depends if MS choose to kill all the DLC you bought for it.

The Xbox 360 would have suffered without Halo 2 to basically prop up Live for a year and lock people (and subsequently their friends) in to the platform. Don't forget that transferring your Live account from Xbox 1 to the 360 killed Live for the Xbox 1 and lost you anything that wasn't already on your hard drive.

Rallisport Challenge 2 online : DEAD. Sunnuvabeach.

Applying lessons about BC from previous generations to the online purchasing, friends list locked in, DRM hobbled current gen is to miss a big chunk of the big picture. At the very least allow me to keep a primary 360 active for online purchases when I buy an Xbox 3, or I'll probably pass the thing up, at least for a few years.

 

[sebbbi]

But there are still optimisations/hacks you can't do because the API gets in the way, right? That's the issue, not that 360 suffers from the huge overheads that come with Direct X on PC spec but rather that the APIs stop devs from getting every last drop out of the system (unlike the PS3)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-directx-360-performance-blog-entry

The forest rendering example in that Eurogamer article might be true for PC DirectX9, but not for Xbox. The article writer hasn't done enough research to confirm his claims. The draw call reuse with recordable command buffers is entirely possible (and a highly used feature) of the Xbox graphics API. If you want confirmation, here is the link to the Microsoft low level API document: http://www.microsoft.com/download/en...s.aspx?id=5313 (check the chapter "Command Buffers"). There are also many more public internet articles describing efficient command buffer use.

 

[kagemaru]

The forest rendering example in that Eurogamer article might be true for PC DirectX9, but not for Xbox. The article writer hasn't done enough research to confirm his claims. The draw call reuse with recordable command buffers is entirely possible (and a highly used feature) of the Xbox graphics API. If you want confirmation, here is the link to the Microsoft low level API document: http://www.microsoft.com/download/en...s.aspx?id=5313 (check the chapter "Command Buffers"). There are also many more public internet articles describing efficient command buffer use.

To be fair, the author of the article was only going by what the developer (Jim Hejl in this case) said.

Thanks for the links though, I always thought the 360 lacked that kind of flexibility.

 

[AlNom]

It's quite neat. A number of things there have actually made it into DX11, i.e. command buffers. It's sort of the beginnings of multithreaded rendering.

That said, I don't get the impression this extended API is particularly specific to Xenos.

 

[Tea2]

Or, just use the 360 you ALREADY OWN since you own those games

That's the thing that makes BC such a non important thing imo. At BEST all you're saving is some room under your TV. Which, big deal. If you care so much about older titles that BC is so important, then you wont mind anyway.

At BEST, I'm able to replay the games I already own with better visuals, faster loading times, maybe even better framerates. That's the holy grail of b.c. to me. 1:1 emulation isn't too exciting, I agree with that.

But really, that's more a novelty than anything. Sony has the right idea, just ditch BC.

And release "HD collections" of games people already own? No thanks. The fact that this business practice exists basically confirms that there is a substantial number of people interested in replaying old games. That's exactly what bc should be for.

 

[SteelOak]

Or, just use the 360 you ALREADY OWN since you own those games

yes I can use my 360 but I don't think this is what MS wants when they are releasing new hardware,I don't think they want to split their community.Look how many people play multiplayer on x360 in games like Call of Duty BO,Halo Reach,Gears and even previous instalments like MW,MW2 and Halo 3 by disabling BC all of those people will be cut off from their favorite multiplayer games but give them ability to play over live on the new console and im sure they will buy it and play those games with anticipation for next good instalments in the series.
For me personaly there is no reason in buying new console until few good multiplayer games will show because I play mainly multiplayer,few lauch titles is not enought but give me ability to play Reach/Halo 4 and Gears 3 on new hardware with (hopefully) new live capabilities and Im there day one.
Besides it would be neat and comfortable to have all my arcade and retail collection on one HDD without need to switch between two consoles and I know that I like when things are simple and comfortable.

. Sony has the right idea, just ditch BC.

maybe right idea for Sony but not so much for gamers ,I don't know a person who likes to be charged for games they already own
besides there was't any multiplayer games with big community on PS2 like there was on xbox with Halo for example.

 

[Rangers]

Call of Duty BO,Halo Reach,Gears and even previous instalments like MW,MW2 and Halo 3 by disabling BC all of those people will be cut off from their favorite multiplayer games

Err, no they wont. They can play them on 360. Or PS3 in that case.

Not that anybody will be playing those games online anyway by then, if we're honest.

 

[function]

Continuity of Xbox Live and digital purchases across generations has value to customers. The value of cross generation Xbox play has already proven itself once.

Transitions between generations are weakspots for vendors. Shore up the join and you are far less vulnerable.
Guaranteeing the continued success of the Xbox Live cash cow is far more important than getting the fastest possible hardware. It's not so important for PS4.

I'm guessing Xbox 3 will have a degree of BC, but I've been holding off digital purchases to wait and see.

 

[kagemaru]

I'll always pick better hardware over BC, but that doesn't mean I won't be disappointed if my 60+ arcade/PSN games aren't playable on my next system. I'll understand it was for the better of the new system, but I'm not so sure the mass market would be so open to that logic. It could be especially confusing for the average consumer if their trophies/achievement points transfer over but none of their digital purchases.

Continuity of Xbox Live and digital purchases across generations has value to customers. The value of cross generation Xbox play has already proven itself once.

Transitions between generations are weakspots for vendors. Shore up the join and you are far less vulnerable.
Guaranteeing the continued success of the Xbox Live cash cow is far more important than getting the fastest possible hardware. It's not so important for PS4.

I'm guessing Xbox 3 will have a degree of BC, but I've been holding off digital purchases to wait and see.

I would say it's equally important for the PS4 since Sony wants PSN to be that cash cow as well.

 

[SteelOak]

Err, no they wont. They can play them on 360. Or PS3 in that case.

we are talking about BC and I can talk only for myself so I know that when there is no new Halo,Gears or other great multiplayer game at launch(there wasn't any this gen) and there is no BC in new hardware(there was this gen in Halo2 and people have played it until they cut it off) I won't be buying it. I need some good reason when I have to spend my money and some 7-10h singleplayer game is not enought because today I play that kind of games rarely only in my breaks from my multiplayer sesions.
So yes for me BC is pretty big deal but only to some point in generation and let's pretend that Im the only one.

Not that anybody will be playing those games online anyway by then, if we're honest.

I don't know what makes you think that but there were people playing halo 2 even after Halo 3 on new hardware was released and this gen is even more multiplayer focused so Im convinced that there will be big community for current gen games(COD in particular) even after the release of new hardware
I also think MS and Sony want all their customers from this gen to migrate on new hardware and what's the better way than giving them ability to switch hardware and let them play their favorite multiplayer games in which they sunk a lot of time.

 

[Tea2]

Does maintaining b.c automatically equal worse hardware/price issues? From what I understand, the problem with PS2-> PS3 transition was completely unique architecture of both which forced Sony to "put a PS2 in every PS3" and this inflated the price. If the next hardware is more of a natural progression/upgrade of current gen, then 100% software emulation should be more easily achieved, right?

 

[kagemaru]

Does maintaining b.c automatically equal worse hardware/price issues? From what I understand, the problem with PS2-> PS3 transition was completely unique architecture of both which forced Sony to "put a PS2 in every PS3" and this inflated the price. If the next hardware is more of a natural progression/upgrade of current gen, then 100% software emulation should be more easily achieved, right?

I think it has more to do with resources or budgets that are being used to make BC work, could instead be used to better benefit the next platform. Which I can totally understand and agree with.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Does maintaining b.c automatically equal worse hardware/price issues? From what I understand, the problem with PS2-> PS3 transition was completely unique architecture of both which forced Sony to "put a PS2 in every PS3" and this inflated the price. If the next hardware is more of a natural progression/upgrade of current gen, then 100% software emulation should be more easily achieved, right?

Yes.

I think a "massive" architectural change (non-progressive) shouldn't be needed for the X360, as long as they stick with an AMD GPU and a PowerPC CPU. Its architecture is still considered recent (unified shaders, UMA...)



I think there's no way Microsoft won't at least have BC with all XBLA content. Dropping that would be a hugely criticised decision.
It would be like Steam dropping all the purchased games from our account everytime we upgraded our PC.

No console ever had that compromise before, and digital distribution is here to stay.

 

[Tea2]

I think it has more to do with resources or budgets that are being used to make BC work, could instead be used to better benefit the next platform. Which I can totally understand and agree with.

Frankly I have absolutely no idea what kind of money we're talking about here but I still find it hard to believe that the budget necessary to develop software emulation on a hardware with similar architecture would be so high that a company the size of Microsoft or Sony would have to cut corners elsewhere.

I think there's no way Microsoft won't at least have BC with all XBLA content. Dropping that would be a hugely criticised decision.

Yeah, I feel if any of the big three announces that there will be some issues with moving digital content to the next platform, they will get destroyed by the press. Not sure if the majority of people would care though.

 

[joker454]

Or, just use the 360 you ALREADY OWN since you own those games

Not sure if that would work. If I remember right when I switched from Xbox to Xbox 360 I had to "transfer" my XBLive account over such that it now worked on my new 360 but no longer worked on my Xbox. That means the old Xbox was basically dead. They would at a minimum have to rectify that and allow peoples Live accounts to work on multiple machines and eliminate the account transfer requirement.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Patsu linked to this in the Vita thread:

Speaking of Sony consoles prior to Vita, specifically PS3, Yoshida said “it had very, very high potential and peak performance, but programming for the PlayStation platforms was a huge challenge for game developers.”

“In a sense, Kutaragi was enjoying challenging game developers,” said Yoshida. “He was especially challenging the top programmers in the world to come up with something amazing to make use of the performance of each iteration of the PlayStation platforms. That was very good – it was great – for the teams with engineers who liked the challenge, but the world has now changed, and today there is a much larger community of developers.”

“The focus has shifted to be less about getting the most out of the hardware, to be about having a very smooth production process. That’s because now it involves so many more people to make one game.”

Lots of devs have been saying this. We now have a clear direction for Sony's next major console - it'll be easy to develop for first and foremost. It'll about the software and services, and not the nerdiness of the underlying kit. I hope we got something pretty nerdy though. I'd like to see something like massively parallel SGX and portable code between devices or somesuch. That'd be very much in Sony's interests given their widespread devices. One set of code on PS4, TVs, digiboxes and mobile devices would create their Sony platform. MS don't have to worry as much about specific hardware as they are all about software interfaces for varied devices.

 

[Rangers]

I think there's no way Microsoft won't at least have BC with all XBLA content.

What about Sony and PSN?

Huh, still dont know, in order to have BC with such a large variety of games, I dont think software BC is going to cut it (and hardware BC would seem out of the question)? Unless the whole "MS holding developers to Direct X" rumor really works out for them.

Perhaps they can leave the 360 to access the next gen consoles network for at least a few years. Again, that only really matters for online though (and even less XBLA/PSN titles would seem to have long lived online). For offline you can play your XBLA/PSN game on your PS3...offline. Assuming they dont do what Joker stated, which I cant imagine they would be able to do exactly that.

 

[kagemaru]

Frankly I have absolutely no idea what kind of money we're talking about here but I still find it hard to believe that the budget necessary to develop software emulation on a hardware with similar architecture would be so high that a company the size of Microsoft or Sony would have to cut corners elsewhere.

I didn't just mean financial budget, but also transistor budget.

If I had to choose between a beefier GPU and no BC or a smaller GPU with BC, I'd go with the former and not the latter.

Yeah, I feel if any of the big three announces that there will be some issues with moving digital content to the next platform, they will get destroyed by the press. Not sure if the majority of people would care though.

I think it would be the opposite actually. The more core-centric gamers would be more understanding when they are the ones more likely to know about it beforehand or understand why it happened this way.

It's the masses who don't read up on video games or have even the basic understanding of the tech involved that may be caught off guard and more effected.

Not sure if that would work. If I remember right when I switched from Xbox to Xbox 360 I had to "transfer" my XBLive account over such that it now worked on my new 360 but no longer worked on my Xbox. That means the old Xbox was basically dead. They would at a minimum have to rectify that and allow peoples Live accounts to work on multiple machines and eliminate the account transfer requirement.

There must have been something wrong with your live account then. How it was supposed to work is: if the account was started on an xbox1 and transferred over to a 360, the account should work on both systems. However if an account was started on a 360, it would not work on the original xbox.