Robbie Bach Interview

[AzBat]

Not sure if everybody is still visiting ComputerAndVideoGames.com, but today they posted part 1 of their Robbie Bach interview at GDC. They will post part 2 tomorrow.

Here's the direct link...
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php?id=102978

It was a pretty good read, but there was one part that I found interesting that almost confirms some thoughts I had a couple of months ago. When we heard the news from M-Systems confirming no hard drive in Xbox2, I speculated that Microsoft would want the Media Center PC to be the hub of the house instead of the Xbox and thus there would be no TiVo-like functionality standard on the Xbox2.

Here's my original comment...

This also works with their new Media Center strategy. I have a feeling Microsoft doesn't want the Xbox to be the center of the living room because they loose money on making the consoles. This would put a WindowsXP PC as the media gateway of the house since they make money on Windows XP and devices based on it: Windows XP Media Center PCs, Media Center Extenders and Portable Media Centers. This strategy is one reason why I believe we won't see TiVo like functions on the standard Xbox Next. Though they may decide to include Media Center Extender technology in it by default since it's mainly only software. They could possibly make another version similar to Sony's PSX, but I doubt they would be able to sell it for a loss like the standard model. So it could be expensive just like the PSX.

In today's interview we learned this...

It seems Sony sees PlayStation 3 as serving as a hub in the home - is that something you agree on for the next generation of hardware?

No, that's actually probably one of many areas we disagree on. It's our view that, when people say: is Xbox at the centre of Microsoft's home strategy, we say no. I think our Media Centre PC is much more likely to be the centre of the home than Xbox.

The reason for that is, the thing you want at the centre has to be a rich, multi-purpose device, a place where you can store all of your media, recorded TV shows, video, photos, music; it has to be a place where you can edit those things. It's got to manage the network, take care of all that stuff.

The PC is the only device that's designed to do that. If Sony wants to take PlayStation 3 and design it to do that, that'll be fine with me as the price point will be $600-700 and they won't get any installed base and they won't have great games for it.

You have to decide which track you're on and our view is that Xbox needs to be a great entertainment device connected to that Media Centre PC.

If you want to use Xbox to play back a TV show you recorded on Media Centre PC you should be able to do that - we've already shown that technology at CES this year, where you'll be able to use Xbox as a connector on the other end of a Media Centre network. You should be able to do that.

Does that mean we want to have all the infrastructure to be able to record those shows and do all that stuff on Xbox? Well, you can't do that at price points consumer want for a games console. Our view is that Xbox needs to continue being a great gaming console, it just happens to be a connected gaming console that lives in that broader environment.

I think this further proves thoughts of no large amounts of storage(>8gb) on the Xbox2.

It will be interesting to read the rest of the interview tomorrow.

Tommy McClain

 

[marconelly!]

Pretty much what I've thought as well. I guess Bach Robbie's comment about $600 machine is made a bit too hastily, though. Nothing is stopping Sony to release two machines, much like they did with PS2 and PSX, and let people decide what extra capabilities they need from their game console. Or simply make an extra $300 upgrade pack for PS3 that will give it a media-hub capabilities

 

[Paul]

Doesn't this contradict earlier statements made by Gates?

"The next-generation Xbox will feature digital media capabilities such as video and photo editing in addition to games. It will also allow for Internet capabilities without the need for direct connections through Wi-Fi."

 

[AzBat]

Pretty much what I've thought as well. I guess Bach Robbie's comment about $600 machine is made a bit too hastily, though. Nothing is stopping Sony to release two machines, much like they did with PS2 and PSX, and let people decide what extra capabilities they need from their game console. Or simply make an extra $300 upgrade pack for PS3 that will give it a media-hub capabilities

True, and there's nothing stopping Microsoft from doing the same thing, but Bach's comments tell me they're not interested.

Tommy McClain

 

[AzBat]

Doesn't this contradict earlier statements made by Gates?

"The next-generation Xbox will feature digital media capabilities such as video and photo editing in addition to games. It will also allow for Internet capabilities without the need for direct connections through Wi-Fi."

I suspect you're talking about this...

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=1229

If so, then that was back on Feb. 12, 2003. A lots changed from then and it wouldn't surprise me that things have changed. But yes, it does contradict. Though I see possibilities where both might be correct. For instance, it could still offer those capabilities, but only through software like the Media Center Extender for Xbox. This would mean that a Media Center PC is still the hub of the house.

Tommy McClain

 

[cthellis42]

Didn't imagine they would be, as the Media Center PC directive seemed to be getting a notable push, and loading up the Xbox 2 would run counter to that. Abandoning the MCPC would rather piss off a lot of OEM's who've been creating and pushing their own versions. (Plus, getting all you'd want in one of those would make a bare console would be too prohibitively expensive.)

Connectivity is the safest route for Microsoft; they can keep the Xbox streamlined, continue to push the Media Center PC's (and the dedicated OS they have for it), and push whatever functionality they can build between them. OEM's are happier because their toes aren't getting trod on, and Microsoft can adopt the pace they want, rather than affecting Xbox gaming by trying to wedge too much inside X2.

Pretty much what I expected, though I wasn't expecting to see what is--perhaps--a large feature fallout in X2 (no hard drive, no backwards compatability...) They usually don't like that from a marketing perspective if nothing else. We'll have to see what the final form ends up like, and if they can keep from alienating some of their userbase because of it. (While "better looking games" was certainly a point for most of my friends, the hard drive has ended up being the real deciding factors for my friends who picked one up. That's a major factor they need to make sure their users still perceive as "handled" rather than "backpedalled.")

 

[cybamerc]

Paul:

> Doesn't this contradict earlier statements made by Gates?

That remains to be seen. Technically those features could still be available eventhough they require a PC for storage. That said it is my distinct opinion that M$ changed strategy not too long ago because of the increased interest in HTPCs and the failure of the first Xbox design. Instead of making Xbox more like a PC they've decided to make it sort of a terminal which gains access to a bunch of features through the PC. This of course basically makes the Xbox irrelevant... that is, if it wasn't for Xbox specific software. Enter XNA.

"Dean Lester: I love that idea because the Windows guy is in charge of the Xbox guys. That really plays to my sensibilities.

J Allard: It's always been that way at this company, baby."

In simple terms, Xbox has gone from a trojan horse to a pile driver. Paving the way for continued Windows domination. Or so they hope.

 

[AzBat]

Pretty much what I expected, though I wasn't expecting to see what is--perhaps--a large feature fallout in X2 (no hard drive, no backwards compatability...) They usually don't like that from a marketing perspective if nothing else. We'll have to see what the final form ends up like, and if they can keep from alienating some of their userbase because of it. (While "better looking games" was certainly a point for most of my friends, the hard drive has ended up being the real deciding factors for my friends who picked one up. That's a major factor they need to make sure their users still perceive as "handled" rather than "backpedalled.")

As for feature fallout, I'm still sitting on the fence on whether I think backward compatibility isn't going to be included. I still think it can happen even with a Power CPU architecture and internal flash storage. But there's a possibility they may decide to scrap due to technical(not >95% compatible) or financial(license fees to Intel and/or Nvidia) reasons.

I also see possibilities where they could make up for any missing previous features. Like going completely wireless(controllers, network, headset, built-in dvd remote sensor). Would probably still have to buy the headset and remotes seperately, but with money they're saving there's no reason why they can't include the DVD license standard.

BTW, the hard drive was not the major selling point for me nor for anybody I know that has one. Though I will say that I've taken advantage of the soundtracks for the few CDs I do own. It would be nice to be able move them over to the new console. That way I could give the kids the old one.

Tommy McClain

 

[marconelly!]

Doesn't this contradict earlier statements made by Gates?

Yes.

That, of course, is because Microsoft PC and Microsoft Xbox divisions are separate and competing entities.

I think backward compatibility isn't going to be included. I still think it can happen even with a Power CPU architecture and internal flash storage.

Unless they can allocate at least 1GB of some kind of storage memory solely for Xbox hard drive emulation, they will not be able to get most of their high profile games running. 1GB is the amount dedicated to game cache (1GB per game, there's three cache sockets totalling 3GB of HDD space)

 

[Guden Oden]

What is it that says VIVO capability has to cost $300 when you stick it into a console? All it takes is one relatively small IC and some not particulary esoteric software to drive it.

Even if everything recorded has to be stored locally it still wouldn't have to cost $300. Even assuming the logic to capture the images costs $50 (gross overexaggeration), for $250 you get as a normal customer about that many gigabytes of harddrive storage TODAY from a net vendor and who knows how much in two years' time, and companies do not buy single units at a time from net vendors, they get discounts directly from the manufacturers. 250GB lasts quite a while, and then there's been rumors of PS3 featuring blueray which records what, close to 30GB per dual-layer disc? Storage wouldn't be much of an issue methinks.

Anyway, it would be possible for Sony to use a media center PC approach too. Let the PS3 capture video via a cheap yet effective single-chip IC, compress the video (no need for dedicated hardware; the CPU will be more than capable of dealing with that task in realtime), boot the datastream up the network to the PC and dump do disk using a program Sony supplies. Nothing complicated with that at all, and it would cost peanuts, if that much even.

 

[cthellis42]

As for feature fallout, I'm still sitting on the fence on whether I think backward compatibility isn't going to be included. I still think it can happen even with a Power CPU architecture and internal flash storage. But there's a possibility they may decide to scrap due to technical(not >95% compatible) or financial(license fees to Intel and/or Nvidia) reasons.

Hence my "perhaps." We don't know what the full extent will be, and we don't know what it will be compared to from competitors, so until that situation changes we get to shrug and say "if" a lot. Hehe...

BTW, the hard drive was not the major selling point for me nor for anybody I know that has one. Though I will say that I've taken advantage of the soundtracks for the few CDs I do own. It would be nice to be able move them over to the new console. That way I could give the kids the old one.

Well, in my friends' case, it was probably also from mis-attributions as well, as the hard drive seemed to be the "cure all" that provided the Xbox with faster loading, leaning on "caching" that probably wasn't there anyway. It's also what makes Live's additional content workable, and hey they certainly LIKED not having to buy a lot of memory cards to manage, so that's icing... (I don't think anyone has yet stored music on it.) It's the feature that seems to be mentioned most, though, even if it gets more expectations loaded on it than it should. <shrugs> Yet more expectations the general public thinks that may have no bearing altogether. (A number of people I've run across think you can load just about any game onto the HD if you want and play it from there to reduce loading times and such, and expect the PS2 HD to bring the same.)

And as much as I point things out or send my friends links, they don't really have the same interest or patience, so it amounts to bunk in the end. I can only <shrug> myself. :?

 

[wco81]

Is XP Media Edition really that big a deal?

Are they really shipping that many XPME PCs? Are a lot of people using them as PVRs or otherwise in their living rooms?

Cuz the first reviews noted some hiccups when recording.

 

[randycat99]

Isn't the whole HD swap file thing for XBox compatibility somewhat academic wrt how the XBox2 will be equipped? Let's say you need 1 GB of HD space, and what does the XBox have for RAM- 64 MB? Given that the XBox2 may have something like 512 MB to 1 GB of RAM, you could fit the 64 MB + 1 GB swap file (w. on-the-fly data compression) + emulation software for a virtual XBox in there using XBox2 RAM alone, no? Naturally, you still wouldn't have save game capability, but that is where the memory cards would come in, I imagine.

 

[cthellis42]

Is XP Media Edition really that big a deal?

Are they really shipping that many XPME PCs? Are a lot of people using them as PVRs or otherwise in their living rooms?

Cuz the first reviews noted some hiccups when recording.

At the moment, no it's not. But most major PC companies (including Sony and Toshiba) have their own offerings, and it's certainly the central hub MS would rather it be. It keeps the focus on the software and on the Windows brand and on all things PC centered--which is where they are strongest. Once you start slipping away to other devices where MS/Windows doesn't hold the most sway it becomes a while different ballgame, so I don't think they want to introduce any confusion on that front from a console. (At least not while they are not dominant in consoles.)

 

[AzBat]

Isn't the whole HD swap file thing for XBox compatibility somewhat academic wrt how the XBox2 will be equipped? Let's say you need 1 GB of HD space, and what does the XBox have for RAM- 64 MB? Given that the XBox2 may have something like 512 MB to 1 GB of RAM, you could fit the 64 MB + 1 GB swap file (w. on-the-fly data compression) + emulation software for a virtual XBox in there using XBox2 RAM alone, no? Naturally, you still wouldn't have save game capability, but that is where the memory cards would come in, I imagine.

Good ideas there Randy. The current Xbox has (3) 750mb partitions used for caching(drives x:, y:, z: ) and a 500mb system partition(drive c: ) used for booting to the dashboard OS. The data partition(drive e: ) is 4895mb, but for purposes of backward compatibility this could be assisgned to a memory card. I'm not sure if it would be necessary to include enough RAM on the Xbox2 to match the 2750MB used by the system and caching. It's possible that maybe only one cache partition ever gets used in a game or it's possible they might not even need the system partition. Obviously I don't know much about the inner workings.

Anyway, my point is that they would probably need from 750mb to 2750mb of storage to be backward compatible(not including the 64mb of system RAM). They could possibly use Xbox2 system RAM to do this. However, the likelyhood that Xbox2 will include more than 512mb or more of system RAM is not very high. Personally, I'm not expecting more than 256MB. Either way, that means between 192mb and 448mb that could be used for emulation software or caching. I just don't think that's going to be enough.

I think the possibility of including enough flash storage for backward compatibility is probably a bit higher than using system RAM. Or they could go the cheap route and make you buy memory cards to support the backward compatibility. Which probably sounds better for Microsoft because they wouldn't have to subsidize the cost of the backward compatibility for every Xbox2 they build. Personally, I wouldn't mind this. Just as long as they provided the option.

Tommy McClain

 

[Megadrive1988]

the second part of the interview is now up

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?page=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php(que)id=102978