zaskaraska
Newcomer
…It's a rumour, I haven't seen it, but I've read people saying Major Nelson have DayZ in his ONE.
Xbox One (Durango) Technical hardware investigation
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
…It's a rumour, I haven't seen it, but I've read people saying Major Nelson have DayZ in his ONE.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Unless Microsoft have plans to port great lumps of the WIN32 API to Xbox One I can't see this happening. It's not a though games exist only within the DirectX APIs.
And if you want a true plug-and-play solution, where you expect to insert a Windows game disc and have it just run then Microsoft will have to emulate all the bits of Windows needed for the installing, including the registry and the other gungy bits of Windows.
And Microsoft's reward for doing this? Losing a buttload of money because now people don't need to buy the Xbox One version, which they get a cut off from licensing.
So. Huge effort. Porting. Emulation. Lose money. It's amazing they've not done it already!
And if you want a true plug-and-play solution, where you expect to insert a Windows game disc and have it just run then Microsoft will have to emulate all the bits of Windows needed for the installing, including the registry and the other gungy bits of Windows.
And Microsoft's reward for doing this? Losing a buttload of money because now people don't need to buy the Xbox One version, which they get a cut off from licensing.
So. Huge effort. Porting. Emulation. Lose money. It's amazing they've not done it already!
zaskaraska
Newcomer
I don't understand :S
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Your proposed:
Which I'm taking to mean give Xbox One owners the ability to insert any Windows game and play it. Now Xbox One owners aren't limited to Xbox One games they may, instead of buying Ryse, buy The Banner Saga. Microsoft lose, they get no cut of The Banner Saga.
This flexibility is not in their interest. Arguably nor is backward compatibility. Let people play things they already own or can obtain without you getting your cut on the sale (which is the basis of the economics of consoles), the manufacturer loses.
zaskaraska
Newcomer
no. They can buy Ryse and/or The banner Saga. MS wins in both situations.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
No. If you give people the choice to buy things which don't benefit you directly, you don't "win". You clearly see value in this, you want to play PC games on your Xbox One. This benefits you but not Microsoft (unless you're buying MGS games).
Don't get me wrong, I see the obvious appeal to consumers, and there's nothing Microsoft can do if you chose to spend your money on things not related to their business, but you're proposing they do a buttload of work so you can not give them money ;-)
How do you think Microsoft wins if you buy The Banner Saga?
zaskaraska
Newcomer
A game you are playing in their platform, it's a game that you aren't playing in other platform.
And is there a platform royalty in windows? (I don't know)
And is there a platform royalty in windows? (I don't know)
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Not giving money to Sony or Nintendo does not mean money for Microsoft. At the end of the day, success is measured on your bottom line and giving people the option to play games for nothing, does not sound good for your bottom line.
Let's agree to disagree
However the technical issue I raised, porting WIN32 APIs to Xbox One, mimicking the Windows desktop environment sufficiently so games will run, is still quite an undertaking for Microsoft.zaskaraska
Newcomer
I don't think that way :S
If MSFT was ever to allow for PC games to run on the XB1, which I think is neither in their best interest nor would produce worthy results, I think they would not let you do it with disks, it would be digital download.
Playing old PC games on TV is quite easy, lots of old pc games runs fine on kaveri for example.
If one wants a hptc it should buy a HTPC, it still does a lot more than what either the PS4 or the 360 are doing and without paywall.
Playing old PC games on TV is quite easy, lots of old pc games runs fine on kaveri for example.
If one wants a hptc it should buy a HTPC, it still does a lot more than what either the PS4 or the 360 are doing and without paywall.
Bad business logic. MS could sell their machine at a loss and charge no royalty fees, maybe for exclusives, so devs want to develop titles. That could lead to the competition dying, but with MS making no money from their machine, it doesn't do them any favours.
Good business sense is looking to maximise profits for oneself, and doesn't concern itself with trying to hamper rivals (except with IP).
No. MS makes no money from people selling Windows games. That's why they want a Windows store-front. PC games on a console would obliterate interest in the platform's native games and effectively kill the machine. MS would only make as much money as they make on the hardware. Perhaps they might get a few game sales, but chances are increased that they'll lose software sales, while at the same time having to shell a load out to implement PC support.
Well, I guess they could only allow signed software to run on the Xbox One. Say pretty much like what some companies do by not allowing their employees loading every web site under the moon.
Since it is basically a x86 architecture, running PC games like Heroes of Might and Magic, Age of Mythology, etc, could be a win.
zaskaraska
Newcomer
Many opinions, not facts. I think that steategy would work. But I can't see future (not yet xD)
TheWretched
Regular
What? There's one fact that's one hundred percent making it useless for MS... MS doesn't get a dime running arbitrary code on their console. And in fact, they might even lose money, if they subsidize the console.
Also, running "any" code on this "low end" console could result in really bad performance. And that would be VERY bad for MSs, or the X0s reputation.
Also, running "any" code on this "low end" console could result in really bad performance. And that would be VERY bad for MSs, or the X0s reputation.
Two 'facts'. 1) It will take a lot of time and effort (and possibly money) for MS to implement Windows game support on XB1. 2) They make no money from sales of Windows software.
Unless you can describe an argument why it would be good business sense for MS to make the expense to enable Windows games on XB1, the existing facts very much favour the view this would be a waste of money with no gain.
zaskaraska
Newcomer
Runing "arbitrary code"??
'Badly written' x86 code which makes use of highly clocked, single cores with lots of OoO efficiencies.
zaskaraska
Newcomer
Sorry, you're right
Why couldn't this be done through the xbox one game vm? There's absolutely no reason why it couldn't do that. They could create a flag in hypervisor that only allows games from the MS store to do this... Doesn't the game vm allow the game to run its own os anyway? Much like every other console game like ever?
What am I missing here? Also games for the winRT API should be able to run pretty much natively and MS will get a cut of those because by next April their will be a single unified store.
What am I missing here? Also games for the winRT API should be able to run pretty much natively and MS will get a cut of those because by next April their will be a single unified store.
- Status
Similar threads
