What Happened To Durango?

[TheChefO]

If you anger/annoy/disappoint the core crowd enough, guess what happens to your sales after the first couple of months? See the WiiU for details. No used games, underpowered or late, high price, always on, Kinect required, subscription virtually required. It is entirely possibly to hit a tipping point with customers and fail spectacularly.

Amen.

From what I can see, Sony will be taking a good chunk of the userbase from MS nextgen.

Sometimes, greed and stupidity intersect and the path of success takes a detour into a dead end.

MS seems to either be asleep at the wheel or letting the wrong people drive ...

 

[Ninjaprime]

So let me see if I've got this right, we're assuming sony has already won because its less ahead than it theoretically was last gen(remember, Teh Cell was almost 3 times as fast as Xenon!). Although, from a dev standpoint Sony's console is a mile behind, but its ok, they have some CUs that may or may not exist and may or may not render, and they will solve everything forever!

Also, despite having twice the RAM, Xbox whatever is gonna take up way more RAM with OS because thats exactly what happened last gen, when sony had 70+ MB of their RAM reserved for the OS, while Microsoft was smart enough to take a smaller fraction. Indeed, Sony is a pro at OS'es and will have a tiny 512MB reserved, even though the Wii U, with half the RAM has twice that much reserved, but Sony is awesome because they are an OS company and will manage to pack way more features than Nintendo in half as much RAM, and have a 7 times smaller OS than Microsoft, because what do those guys know about OS'es, right?

Clearly all the consumers, 99% of which have no clue what a CU or Flop or GDDR5 is are going to go with Sony because they will suddenly be enlightened because the PS4 will beam the knowledge of how much better it is on one or two specs than the Xbox because those two specs are the only real specs that matter and any specs that Xbox may have that are better don't really matter because they are not flops.

That about sum it up?

 

[Tap In]

So let me see if I've got this right, we're assuming sony has already won because its less ahead than it theoretically was last gen(remember, Teh Cell was almost 3 times as fast as Xenon!). Although, from a dev standpoint Sony's console is a mile behind, but its ok, they have some CUs that may or may not exist and may or may not render, and they will solve everything forever!

Also, despite having twice the RAM, Xbox whatever is gonna take up way more RAM with OS because thats exactly what happened last gen, when sony had 70+ MB of their RAM reserved for the OS, while Microsoft was smart enough to take a smaller fraction. Indeed, Sony is a pro at OS'es and will have a tiny 512MB reserved, even though the Wii U, with half the RAM has twice that much reserved, but Sony is awesome because they are an OS company and will manage to pack way more features than Nintendo in half as much RAM, and have a 7 times smaller OS than Microsoft, because what do those guys know about OS'es, right?

Clearly all the consumers, 99% of which have no clue what a CU or Flop or GDDR5 is are going to go with Sony because they will suddenly be enlightened because the PS4 will beam the knowledge of how much better it is on one or two specs than the Xbox because those two specs are the only real specs that matter and any specs that Xbox may have that are better don't really matter because they are not flops.

That about sum it up?

yes

 

[Brad Grenz]

Have you seen the Vita OS? It's fucking sweet. Win8 is a trainwreck. The VitaOS was built as a game OS with lots of cool modern convenience. Win8 was built trying to chase an emerging market MS doesn't understand, while compromising the fundamentals of what had made their product desirable. Frankly, it is very easy to believe MS is seeing dollar signs and will make choices that undermine their position in the game industry.

 

[ERP]

Have you seen the Vita OS? It's fucking sweet. Win8 is a trainwreck. The VitaOS was built as a game OS with lots of cool modern convenience. Win8 was built trying to chase an emerging market MS doesn't understand, while compromising the fundamentals of what had made their product desirable. Frankly, it is very easy to believe MS is seeing dollar signs and will make choices that undermine their position in the game industry.

Are we talking the shell or the OS, because they are two very different things.

 

[Nisaaru]

It's not too bright to invest so much R&D & time into a custom design which aims so low as to allow a competitor to easily outperform your offering...

I agree. The design would make far more sense if the ESRAM part would have more bandwidth than the 102GB as the GPU has a lot more internal bus bandwidth.

 

[dagamer]

It's a logical and valid argument, but I disagree 100%.

ps360 sold roughly 100million units. Smart phones, pcs and tabs sell many times this, thus there is an untapped market which wasn't interested in what ps360 had to offer. Was it that it didn't have enough apps? Not enough facebook integration? No. I'd argue that the untapped market didn't see anything on the boxes which interested them (ie games) enough to purchase.

Two ways to then expand this market:

1) make it cheaper for game developers to experiment with content and develop more variety which may lure in the untapped demographic

2) make the hardware more capable to deliver compelling experiences which can draw in the fence sitters

IMO, these are one in the same. Better hardware means less time from devs having to find every nook and cranny of performance to get the box up to speed. It also means a more compelling experience for the consumer.

Cheaping out on the hardware only serves to blur the performance line of console and mobile even sooner down the road.

I'd also beg to differ on neither company making any money off the core gamer. MS is making over a Billion Dollars annually on xblg alone. Casuals typically aren't the type to pony up for a monthly multiplayer gaming fee. This profit doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of potential ad revenue in the future though, but as is, $1B+/yr is pretty good money.

That thinking is flawed. Ideally, if a system bought on launch day is working, then it never needs to be replaced, even after 8 years. On the other hand, a phone is replaced every 2 years, with many carriers actually letting you do it every 18 months w/new contract pricing. That's 5 upgrades!

Also, you can share one console with multiple people. Sharing a smartphone is a cruel thing to do.

 

[Xenio]

So let me see if I've got this right, we're assuming sony has already won because its less ahead than it theoretically was last gen(remember, Teh Cell was almost 3 times as fast as Xenon!). Although, from a dev standpoint Sony's console is a mile behind, but its ok, they have some CUs that may or may not exist and may or may not render, and they will solve everything forever!

Also, despite having twice the RAM, Xbox whatever is gonna take up way more RAM with OS because thats exactly what happened last gen, when sony had 70+ MB of their RAM reserved for the OS, while Microsoft was smart enough to take a smaller fraction. Indeed, Sony is a pro at OS'es and will have a tiny 512MB reserved, even though the Wii U, with half the RAM has twice that much reserved, but Sony is awesome because they are an OS company and will manage to pack way more features than Nintendo in half as much RAM, and have a 7 times smaller OS than Microsoft, because what do those guys know about OS'es, right?

Clearly all the consumers, 99% of which have no clue what a CU or Flop or GDDR5 is are going to go with Sony because they will suddenly be enlightened because the PS4 will beam the knowledge of how much better it is on one or two specs than the Xbox because those two specs are the only real specs that matter and any specs that Xbox may have that are better don't really matter because they are not flops.

That about sum it up?

Of course

 

[Brad Grenz]

Are we talking the shell or the OS, because they are two very different things.

I'm talking about the whole package. No one notices all the technical improvements under the hood in Windows 8 because they don't want to deal with terrible new UI.

 

[Silenti]

So let me see if I've got this right, we're assuming sony has already won because its less ahead than it theoretically was last gen(remember, Teh Cell was almost 3 times as fast as Xenon!). Although, from a dev standpoint Sony's console is a mile behind, but its ok, they have some CUs that may or may not exist and may or may not render, and they will solve everything forever!
...
That about sum it up?

Actually, I am wondering if they both may lose. And no, that doesn't mean I think Nintendo is going to clean up, I think the WiiU was DOA.

 

[TheChefO]

So let me see if I've got this right, we're assuming sony has already won because its less ahead than it theoretically was last gen(remember, Teh Cell was almost 3 times as fast as Xenon!). Although, from a dev standpoint Sony's console is a mile behind, but its ok, they have some CUs that may or may not exist and may or may not render, and they will solve everything forever!

Also, despite having twice the RAM, Xbox whatever is gonna take up way more RAM with OS because thats exactly what happened last gen, when sony had 70+ MB of their RAM reserved for the OS, while Microsoft was smart enough to take a smaller fraction. Indeed, Sony is a pro at OS'es and will have a tiny 512MB reserved, even though the Wii U, with half the RAM has twice that much reserved, but Sony is awesome because they are an OS company and will manage to pack way more features than Nintendo in half as much RAM, and have a 7 times smaller OS than Microsoft, because what do those guys know about OS'es, right?

Clearly all the consumers, 99% of which have no clue what a CU or Flop or GDDR5 is are going to go with Sony because they will suddenly be enlightened because the PS4 will beam the knowledge of how much better it is on one or two specs than the Xbox because those two specs are the only real specs that matter and any specs that Xbox may have that are better don't really matter because they are not flops.

That about sum it up?

ps3 v xb360 ... that's an interesting example. Why do you think most games and gamers never saw this compute advantage on ps3?

... right.

Now factor in that both of these systems will be using nearly identical architecture. Neither of which is anywhere near as difficult to program for as ps3 (or ps2).

This means any difference in power will quickly be seen and that difference gap will not close as there is no exotic-and-difficult-to-come-to-grips-with-architecture™ which "just takes more time to come to grips with".

As for Sony being a OS ninja, I have no illusions of such, but they aren't incapable either. Take a look at what other devices have for ram resources and what they are capable of doing in that space. 512mb is plenty. I have no doubt Sony will be able to match nearly every non-gaming feature of Durango aside from running a full-blown windows8 OS in the background (which has limited use in a living-room environment anyway).

As far as what consumer know or don't know WRT specs, you're right. They likely don't have a clue. But they do have a pair of eyes. And most also know some techie that will give them advice on the new boxes. When the first multiplats show up (at launch), if the difference is anywhere near as big as I'm thinking, there will be repercussions for Durango...

XBLG - there will be pressure to either reduce or eliminate the fee as it is no longer a premium service on a premium platform.

Pricing - there will be pressure to sit comfortably under the msrp of the competing platform which offers the superior experience.

Ad revenue - Ads on a pay service was already a difficult pill to swallow. Ads on a pay service for a subpar platform ... goodluck.

If the tides turn drastic (think Wiiu), then obviously this will have an impact on games library (above and beyond the fact that MS internal studios are a fraction of Sony's).

The point of all of the above, is that MS was already pushing the envelope WRT monetizing their platform. They couldn't/can't afford to then match that push with a subpar experience. At least not without consequences ...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

ps3 v xb360 ... that's an interesting example. Why do you think most games and gamers never saw this compute advantage on ps3?

Because XB360 was more efficienct and achieved the same or better results with less raw computer power...

 

[TheChefO]

Because XB360 was more efficienct and achieved the same or better results with less raw computer power...

Right ... and how does this architectural advantage compare to Durango?

Imagine a ps3 with 72 unified shaders instead of xbox's 48...(both from ATI's same architecture) And a unified pool of gddr3 vs xbox ddr2 plus edram ...

yeah not quite as pretty.

Now imagine they both had the tricore xcpu.

Again, no mysterious exotic architecture to conjure over the positives and negatives this gen. What you see is what you get for the most part, and it looks like MS seriously undervalued what Sony would bring to the table.

Sad thing is, it isn't like Sony shot for the stars with Orbis, they were/are actually pretty conservative WRT BOM. It's just that MS shot for mediocrity and gave Sony a one up.

 

[temesgen]

Right ... and how does this architectural advantage compare to Durango?

Imagine a ps3 with 72 unified shaders instead of xbox's 48...(both from ATI's same architecture) And a unified pool of gddr3 vs xbox ddr2 plus edram ...

yeah not quite as pretty.

Now imagine they both had the tricore xcpu.

Again, no mysterious exotic architecture to conjure over the positives and negatives this gen. What you see is what you get for the most part, and it looks like MS seriously undervalued what Sony would bring to the table.

I think you raised an excellent point about XBLG earlier but I am not so sure the differences will be as large as you are suggesting this time. We'll need to wait and see what MS's business model looks like but it appears they may have sacrificed some overall system power for some other resources i.e. Kinect and more memory and if that turns out to be true they may very well struggle the same way the PS3 did due to the new optical format.

I find it ironic that many who praised the 360 for its focus on gaming last time or were critical of PS3 for forcing users to pay for new optical format now suddenly are arguing the reverse.

IMO if MS straddle the fence between core gaming and casuals they may do very well this time or perhaps you are right the core is more important bc casuals may be more likely to pay 5 dollars for an app on their tablet instead of investing hundreds of dollars in a new platform and paying a premium for the software. The casual market may have enough options this time that consoles need to focus on their core market who is willing to pay a premium for hardware and software. We'll just have to see but I do agree its a bit unrealistic to think casuals will invest hundreds in hardware, 60 dollars for games and pay a subscription for something they use occasionally so if that does turn out to be MS's model I would say they should have learned from the Kin failure.

 

[dobwal]

I'm talking about the whole package. No one notices all the technical improvements under the hood in Windows 8 because they don't want to deal with terrible new UI.

The main issue with Windows 8 is that is such a large departure from what we know as windows. And a desktop OS requires way more utility and functionality then a portable gaming OS. If you stuck Vita interface on a desktop computer it wouldn't be widely accepted as the best thing since slice cheese.

Nevermind that things like party chat and other features that the 360 had over the PS3 had nothing to do with the interface and most gamers spend less than 1% of their console using the interface.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Right ... and how does this architectural advantage compare to Durango?

We. Don't. Know. Yet. To those incapable of understanding more than some numbers, Orbis beats Durango and they can run around claiming Durango is Teh Doomed. To everyone of sense, we'll wait until we know more about the machines. The difference might be 20% on screen, which Joe Gamer doesn't perceive, and there might be compelling service and price differences.

As ever, too many unknowns at this point to waste time with unfounded conjecture.

 

[TheChefO]

...it appears they may have sacrificed some overall system power for some other resources i.e. Kinect...

That's again part of the problem. If the decision is made to include kinect2.0 in every box, then processing power needs to be ADDED to accommodate the device's processing needs, not diminished. MS is acting as if it is in a vacuum and there are no competitors or alternatives.

Speaking of the irony of system support, I was one of the biggest critics of Sony's approach last time. I knew it would cost them dearly and in the long run, not be worth the risk (stupid).

This time, it's again clear to me which of the two is being foolish in their execution and design ...

 

[TheChefO]

We. Don't. Know. Yet. To those incapable of understanding more than some numbers, Orbis beats Durango and they can run around claiming Durango is Teh Doomed. To everyone of sense, we'll wait until we know more about the machines. The difference might be 20% on screen, which Joe Gamer doesn't perceive, and there might be compelling service and price differences.

As ever, too many unknowns at this point to waste time with unfounded conjecture.

If they were very different and unknown architectures, then the wait and see approach would make sense as there would be too many variables to make educated guess WRT performance.

For example,
If MS was using PowerVR (super efficient, and no high powered pc versions to compare to) then it would make sense to wait and see.

If Sony were using Cell 2.0, again far too different from jaguar to draw conclusions.


As is, these boxes are nearly identical (except for how many compute resources are available to each and bandwidth). Again, we don't know for fact exactly what the end result difference will be, but they are far too similar to not compare and come to a logical conclusion which sees a clear disadvantage in Durango.

 

[Silenti]

We. Don't. Know. Yet. To those incapable of understanding more than some numbers, Orbis beats Durango and they can run around claiming Durango is Teh Doomed. To everyone of sense, we'll wait until we know more about the machines. The difference might be 20% on screen, which Joe Gamer doesn't perceive, and there might be compelling service and price differences.

As ever, too many unknowns at this point to waste time with unfounded conjecture.

However, the information we do have is not exactly blowing peoples doors off now is it? Maybe VG Leaks is dead wrong, maybe there is plenty of "special sauce", but as of now it does not look good for any of the Big3 at the moment. While I am not panicking yet, I remain skeptical. All the information we possess that has credibility does not speak to our hopes, it speaks to our fears.

Just saw the thread tags at the bottom of the page. That's hilarious.

 

[Ninjaprime]

As far as what consumer know or don't know WRT specs, you're right. They likely don't have a clue. But they do have a pair of eyes. And most also know some techie that will give them advice on the new boxes. When the first multiplats show up (at launch), if the difference is anywhere near as big as I'm thinking, there will be repercussions for Durango...

The average pair of eyes can't tell 720p from 1080p or 30 fps from 60 fps, according to various tests I've seen. The difference between them, if the rumored specs are even correct, isn't even enough for either of those differences. You think the average person is going to pick out much lesser differences than those? You think developers are going to bother to make big differences between them when they could just make one set of assets and have it run a little faster on one or the other? The lowest hanging fruit is probably using the extra RAM on the Xbox720s for more textures, ect, and the lowest hanging fruit is going to be the one picked most.

Somewhere you appear to have equated 50% more shader flops to being overall exactly 50% more powerful. Nothing could be further from the truth. Shifty's 20% guess is much closer to reality. In a time of diminishing returns on graphics, when it takes 10x the processing power to make something look 2-3x better, the difference between them will be practically nothing. Except that Microsoft is a quantum leap ahead on developer support, software and relations.