• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft unifying PC/XB1 platforms, Phil implies Xbox moving to incremental upgrades

been a PS user since the PS2 and have never thought about getting XB but thats all changed now. sony... i fully expect that you follow ms' lead and open up the platform otherwise i don't know if i'll be buying your hardware in the future.
 

EvB

Member
Additionally the number of folks who can shell out for a new console often aren't that numerous and mostly also PC folks. So there are a lot of problems with this business plan.

Haven't like 50million people shelled out for a new console in the last 24 months?
 

Shin-Ra

Junior Member
As long as they stick to releasing models every 3-4 years with each model being supported for at least 6 years (the length of a gaming gen), with modern games being able to work on the relevent models (similar to iOS apps across various iOS devices) then I wouldn't see the problem.
Who's going to hold them to that promise, which they'd never make in the first place because nobody would believe it.

Because it can't be worse?
What.

- console gaming has NOT worked for so long [see the loss leading fiasco it's been ever til now]

- current console games look like CRAP compared to previous generations
What fiasco, and stop playing crap looking games if it offends you.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
I don't think that gaming tech moves fast enough to be worth a yearly upgrade. Probably every 3 years?

Every three is still twice as often or more than we currently get consoles. And if they are sold at a small profit, it can be a good revenue stream for them, in addition to keeping people in their software environment (live store)
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
That the hardware will be compatible with future software or vice versa.

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. You mean like the next gen Xbox TWO (that comes out in 2018), being able play games that will come out for the Xbox THREE in 2022?
 

Markoman

Member
I don't think that gaming tech moves fast enough to be worth a yearly upgrade. Probably every 3 years?

Once again, I wasn't seriously talking about yearly upgrades.
I'm ok with 4-5 year console cycles (more towards 5 years), so an upgrade in between
wouldn't make sense, because of diminishing returns.You can't upgrade every part of the console easily, so those upgrades in the midth of a 'normal' generation won't give us huge technical improvements (only better fps and resolution). BUT you can't keep one of those mobile CPUs for more than 5 years! This is increasing the gap between PC and consoles even more down the line, because I just don't see MS coming up with an architecture with off the shelf parts which let's you start with maybe GTX970 level GFX on Xbox2 and then after 6 years you're at Titan2 level GFX. Look at those things in real-life. They are huuuge. Small boxes that run games have technical and physical limitations - don't forget console focus on low power consumption either.
 

LurkingFear

Member
been a PS user since the PS2 and have never thought about getting XB but thats all changed now. sony... i fully expect that you follow ms' lead and open up the platform otherwise i don't know if i'll be buying your hardware in the future.

DLVk3xn.gif
 
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. You mean like the next gen Xbox TWO (that comes out in 2018), being able play games that will come out for the Xbox THREE in 2022?
And somehow the new boxes will have new features. And when that happens, somehow the old boxes will still be compatible with the new features on the new boxes even without those features.

My head is spinning.

To distill my point: forward compatability will either be limited in scope or it will limit game design for future titles. Or it will limit the feature set of future iterations.

You really can't have it all.
 

Piper Az

Member
Consoles are effective because of simplicity - you buy the machine and it plays all the games for it without hassle. When you introduce upgrades, it adds confusion to most general folks and attractiveness of simple console is gone (gaffers would be fine navigating different versions of consoles).
 
Some people are trying to suggest that consumers don't buy hardware for the promise of new features, upgraded capability, enhanced experiences....they're pushing that Apple users buy Apple for enhanced UI and such....lol....Apple users are just one template for the consumer, and you can bet your sorry ass that Apple users are also buying new hardware because they expect the actual hardware to be more capable of handling a bigger workload, faster processing, better megapixel capability....

the whole damn reason the console generation phenomenon exists is because of the allure of better processing, better graphics, the unseen experiences to come, the promise of being aligned to newer tech [FMV, polygons, online, 1080P monitors]......so much backwards logic existing here just to try to push back on the implied narrative that somehow MS might come back into this generation with enhanced power much sooner than expected.

If MS does this, Sony will likely also have a PS4.5.......which is certain to piss off so many here who religiously focus on the 'better' experience out there and the 'suffering' of poor, inconsolable XB1 SOBs.....smh

I would be all in on this...and I am almost fully expecting to see MS come up with an XB1 S and XB1 Upgrade....an upgrade program that would allow XB1 users to exchange their hardware either through a swap of components or outright hardware switch...I'm in for $150 exchange if they can make it happen. Oculus Rift could then potentially work with all upgraded XB1....

The writing is on the wall...consoles are being pressured by so many devices, they have to grow to become something more...
 
it is amazing how quickly you came around this idea now that ms is hinting at doing it. here are some quotes for reference when you questioned my idea of a ps4 premium and even calling it bad ....


"Again, you are talking about a different industry within the tech world. Game systems don't follow the same model that cell phones do and the majority of consumers are used to having their console be relevant for 5+ years.

Easier ports/connectivity in a new model is fine. The newer model running games notably better though would cause backlash especially with how easy it is for tech comparison articles and videos to spread (social media). People with the older model will feel screwed since they thought the system would follow the same model as previous consoles (with many people putting good money into the console via game purchases due to that).

This would be bad. There's a ton of current gen only games coming out, therefore causing people to buy current gen only consoles now. We are getting into the peak of the PS4 and Xbox One's life in terms of their game library. People who just bought a PS4 would be very upset if there's an announcement for a newer model that has more power just a year or so later.

Bad examples. Nintendo has been doing remodels for their handhelds for a long time (more than 10 years) and the Elite is just a controller (there has always been multiple options and prices for controllers). It's also a controller that will work for all Xbox One users and not just people who (say) bought the system this year.

Bad idea in my opinion. I get why people (especially the more hardcore) would have no problem with laying down the extra money in ditching their old PS4 and getting a "PS4 Plus" but a new model like that would create too many questions. "What model is best for me?", "Should I even put the time/effort into making features for me game specifically for PS4 Plus if the majority of people are on the regular model?", "What's the difference? What games make better use of the Plus? Are they games I'm even interested in?", "Is my old system useless now?", etc.

Again, all questions similar to what people were saying in terms of SEGA products during the middle of the '90s. The home console space will never be ready for this. There's too much of a foundation/expectation for a successful console getting top of the line support for at least 5 years before it gets outdated by its successor."

link for conversation where there are many that ridiculed the idea of an upgraded console

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=188973578&highlight=#post188973578

Uh oh
 
Consoles are effective because of simplicity - you buy the machine and it plays all the games for it without hassle. When you introduce upgrades, it adds confusion to most general folks and attractiveness of simple console is gone (gaffers would be fine navigating different versions of consoles).

What's easier than having a huge library of backwards compatible games?
 
And somehow the new boxes will have new features. And when that happens, somehow the old boxes will still be compatible with the new features on the new boxes even without those features.

My head is spinning.

Currently it is possible to build a PC that has a lot more power than a PS4/Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.

In the same way, there could be a new Xbox that comes out that is more powerful than the Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.
The fact that the Xbox One would still be supported is what they are referring to as forward compatibility.

Is your head still spinning?
 
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. You mean like the next gen Xbox TWO (that comes out in 2018), being able play games that will come out for the Xbox THREE in 2022?

Think of it this way - a PC you bought in 2010 can play games released today. Now, they MAY run like crap, but it'll play them, pretty much. And you can go into the settings and set everything to ultra low to make it a little better.

So, Xbox One will be "ultra low", two will be "medium" and three will be "high". You see?

Personally, I don't think there will be a distinct XBox Two and Three, just a sticker on a PC saying "XBOX Certified!"
 

tinfoilhatman

all of my posts are my avatar
Currently it is possible to build a PC that has a lot more power than a PS4/Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.

In the same way, there could be a new Xbox that comes out that is more powerful than the Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.
The fact that the Xbox One would still be supported is what they are referring to as forward compatibility.

Is your head still spinning?


I seriously don't get how this is so hard for people to wrap their heads arounds, DirectX(whatever the hell it's called now) can take care of most of this "automagically"
 
Detective GAF at work.

Also, please understand, this is Phil Spencer we're talking about. He's a friend to all gamers and obviously, none of the concerns that were brought up about a PlayStation hardware revision would apply here.

He's the philanthropist.
 

w0s

Member
How many do it often?

How many have a chance often?

What if MS or stores did trade up planes where you trade in your xbox and get a better one for 150 dollars.

I respect that you are some type of programmer but man it is hard not to read your replies like you think you know everything going on and anyone else talking to the contrary is a moron.
 
Consoles are effective because of simplicity - you buy the machine and it plays all the games for it without hassle. When you introduce upgrades, it adds confusion to most general folks and attractiveness of simple console is gone (gaffers would be fine navigating different versions of consoles).

If it's so confusing...why do Android and IPhone devices do well at the high end and the low end? The hard part is solved...software compatibility won't be an issue. Nobody who is a casual casual user is going to be dissatisfied with the graphics capability of XB1/PS4...otherwise mobile games wouldn't be a thing...and mobile games are huge and many of them have crappy crappy graphics compared to what I'm seeing on my XB1.

The more they play of their system, the more they would be part of the ecosystem, they would grow to care about it, and then eventually the word would get spread to them that there is more to the XB1 ecosystem, an enhanced version with better graphics. It's not that hard to envision.....plenty here are just coming up with the logic from yesteryear...before yearly hardware updates became a thing....

I'm not even an Apple user...I've been an Android user the entire time....and I update my phone every year, because that's what makes sense to me. It's affordable, I sell my old handset that still is entirely functional...I just want the speedier processor, faster UI experience, and sharper screen quality, along with something that is an update design overall
 

krang

Member
And somehow the new boxes will have new features. And when that happens, somehow the old boxes will still be compatible with the new features on the new boxes even without those features.

My head is spinning.

To distill my point: forward compatability will either be limited in scope or it will limit game design for future titles. Or it will limit the feature set of future iterations.

You really can't have it all.

I get your point, but look at these current consoles - feature innovation has pretty much plateaued and remains at stuff like the Xbox rumble triggers which aren't a necessity. I don't foresee this being the hurdle you think it is from this point onwards.
 

EvB

Member
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. You mean like the next gen Xbox TWO (that comes out in 2018), being able play games that will come out for the Xbox THREE in 2022?

There won't be a NEXT Gen Xbox
You'll get 2 or 3 machines, each faster than the last over the same 10 year time scale.

Like when you buy a phone and it does the same thing as your last one and all the same apps work, except everything feels nicer and smoother (until they bloat the OS and turn down animation speed to make it slow again :p)
 

WolvenOne

Member
Yeeeeeah, it's not happening. The economics work against this, I'm sorry. A ton of console manufacturers over the years have tried to create iterative versions of their hardware, and it have never worked out. The problem is that developers will by default develop games to run on the best selling incarnation of the hardware, which would be the base-line version in this case. As such, few developers are going to take time to add new features and graphical settings that only a small fraction of the userbase can take advantage of, not when it's going to work against any optimization they're trying to do anyway.

So no, this is a prediction that execs make every five years or so like clockwork. It's actually surprising just how consistent this prediction is.
 

gamz

Member
How many do it often?

How many of us that bought a new day 1 console last generation still have it? I mean I can imagine a large amount bought more then one iteration of a console last generation.

I bought two PS3 and 2-3 (I seriously lost count) of Xbox's.
 

Crayon

Member
Maybe Bgamer90 just misspoke or made a typo?

Or wait! Maybe he didn't reeeeeeaaaly say that. Yeah I bet your reading comprehension is messed up.

.

I remember that thread. I actually like the idea of forward an back compatible consoles. I just don't think Ms will actually do it. I think they are floating out vague bullshit PR as usual an a few of you Baghdad Bobs are running with the ball.

Ms is turning the ship around to get steam. It's 10 years too late and that's their preferred point of entry.
 
PC gamers on this board complain when "this person just doesn't understand PC gaming, do they?", when others make comments about how consoles can use controllers and plug into TVs, or comments about yearly $200 hardware upgrades.

In the very same way, I think some gamers on this board just don't understand console gaming, do they? If your definition of a console is "a cheap PC that's plug and play" then you are missing the point. I can understand if people like this see the logic of Microsoft's recent moves. When everything is either a PC or a crappy PC, what's one less crappy PC?

"Again, you are talking about a different industry within the tech world. Game systems don't follow the same model that cell phones do and the majority of consumers are used to having their console be relevant for 5+ years.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=188973578&highlight=#post188973578
Shameful.
 

gamz

Member
Every three is still twice as often or more than we currently get consoles. And if they are sold at a small profit, it can be a good revenue stream for them, in addition to keeping people in their software environment (live store)

Just curious, how many iterations of Xbox's or Playstations did you buy last generation?
 

gamz

Member
Maybe Bgamer90 just misspoke or made a typo?

Or wait! Maybe he didn't reeeeeeaaaly say that. Yeah I bet your reading comprehension is messed up.

.

I remember that thread. I actually like the idea of forward an back compatible consoles. I just don't think Ms will actually do it. I think they are floating out vague bullshit PR as usual an a few of you Baghdad Bobs are running with the ball.

Ms is turning the ship around to get steam. It's 10 years too late and that's their preferred point of entry.

Why? They are doing backward now.
 
Currently it is possible to build a PC that has a lot more power than a PS4/Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.

In the same way, there could be a new Xbox that comes out that is more powerful than the Xbox One, but runs the same games that just look better.
The fact that the Xbox One would still be supported is what they are referring to as forward compatibility.

Is your head still spinning?
Currently the PC is an open platform that allows you to install a wide variety of software that enables features aside from just making shit look better.

An argument posed earlier on and multiple times since is that these new boxes would not only include a graphics update, but also new features.

I specifically mentioned features, didn't I? I'm pretty sure I did. If I was only discussing graphics, maybe I would've mentioned it, like, once in that entire fucking post. Guess I can't assume people will not deliberately misconstrue my statements to shut down the discussion.
 
So no, this is a prediction that execs make every five years or so like clockwork. It's actually surprising just how consistent this prediction is.
Do you have an example of this? Not because I doubt you, but because I've not -- personally -- heard too many stories of execs or pundits saying iterative hardware should be a thing.

It would be enlightening to the discussion if we could examine past examples.

I remember SEGA 32x and I remember Pachter's Wii HD prediction, but that's it.
 

Zedox

Member
They do have to convince people to jump in. To buy the games on w10 store, to buy a new system sooner rather than later.

Additionally the number of folks who can shell out for a new console often aren't that numerous and mostly also PC folks. So there are a lot of problems with this business plan.

I agree. I do think that it will make those that come to the xbox side much later can get the benefits of coming in later. But from a business perspective that they have a lot of work to do in order to sell the newer hardware.
 

vcc

Member
How many have a chance often?

What if MS or stores did trade up planes where you trade in your xbox and get a better one for 150 dollars.

I respect that you are some type of programmer but man it is hard not to read your replies like you think you know everything going on and anyone else talking to the contrary is a moron.

$150 price point would be attractive but could they do that considering their current price point is $300. What would they do with the old machines. Does the business of that make sense. MS is in it for the money over all, as it every other player. A lot of the speculation in the positive direction implies they will give away stuff just because.

I'm a former non game dev current business side guy.
 

Shin-Ra

Junior Member
You mean developers are going to choose to not make a good experience for the ~20 million or so potential customers? LMFAO
If there's ~100 million more powerful Windows 10 devices they can target without the extra optimisation effort, yes.

The Xbox releases in 2013 plays the same games. They are still getting games for the foreseeable future. So how is it a lack of support? How does it represent a smaller share? Regarding people playing with varying frame rates and resolutions, that's been going on for decades on PC... It doesn't really bother anyone.

Regarding kb/m that doesn't matter for most genres. And the ones it does effect, you just segregate the players...
Xbone's already less of a focus for Microsoft's game developers now they have to make Windows 10 versions for a variety of PC configs as well. See above about the smaller share.

I think it does bother PC gamers when they're disadvantaged against other players, and that's PC players. Console players don't have to deal with that.

Segregating players by input and/or performance just splits them into 'platforms' again.
 
$150 price point would be attractive but could they do that considering their current price point is $300. What would they do with the old machines. Does the business of that make sense. MS is in it for the money over all, as it every other player. A lot of the speculation in the positive direction implies they will give away stuff just because.

I'm a former non game dev current business side guy.
Why wouldn't they be able to disassemble the old Xbox parts and use it for recycling as part of the upgrade? They did similar deals early on with trades on PS3 and 360 hardware. This is MS we're talking about... Whatever money they lose on the hardware side, they will make back on the software side... Especially if Xbox stays a walled platform at least for games.
 

vcc

Member
How many of us that bought a new day 1 console last generation still have it? I mean I can imagine a large amount bought more then one iteration of a console last generation.

I bought two PS3 and 2-3 (I seriously lost count) of Xbox's.

Day1, ~1m of each PS4 and XB1. Repeat purchasers? tough number to come by. Everyone here is somewhat not representative of the norm. As we're invested in the games industry. I had 2 PS3's because the launch one broke. 1 360 as I got in late and it didn't brake. 1 wii, 1 wii u, 2 psps, 2 vitas, 3 DS, 2 3DS, 1ps2, 1ps1, 1 DC, 1 n64, 1snes, 1nes etc... But I'm a gaming whale. I spend enormous amounts on gaming.
 

Coxy100

Banned
Haven't like 50million people shelled out for a new console in the last 24 months?
And do you really think that many people would buy a new one every 2 years? 50 odd million people have bought a console with the belief it will last for the next few years / won't need to buy a new one till the next generation. Those that like to upgrade tend to get a PC. Those that like it nice and simple get a console (generally)
 

EvB

Member
I agree. I do think that it will make those that come to the xbox side much later can get the benefits of coming in later. But from a business perspective that they have a lot of work to do in order to sell the newer hardware.

There are plenty of people who ran out and upgrade their PSX to PSOne , PS2 to 2000 series models, 360's to 360 Elites and the S models and Ps3 to PS3 Slim.
Let alone going out and buying Collectors edition, Limited edition and fancy coloured machines.
This wouldn't be any different except the machine you are going out to buy might actually have additional capability.

I would actually have to sit down and count how many times I've done this myself.
 

Robcat

Banned
The first new box would be a no Brainer. 4k Netflix YouTube better or on par with ps4 in terms of games. Drop the price of the Xbox one $100 and sell the new box $50 more than the ps4. Bundle some games and I'm in.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Just curious, how many iterations of Xbox's or Playstations did you buy last generation?

Two PS3s (launch and slim in 09), and a 360 (died of RROD).

I would gladly buy even more often if the console did more with each iteration.

But why do you ask?
 

mcrommert

Banned
That's because Your Understanding is all derived directly from MS PR.

Maybe Bgamer90 just misspoke or made a typo?

Or wait! Maybe he didn't reeeeeeaaaly say that. Yeah I bet your reading comprehension is messed up.

.

I remember that thread. I actually like the idea of forward an back compatible consoles. I just don't think Ms will actually do it. I think they are floating out vague bullshit PR as usual an a few of you Baghdad Bobs are running with the ball.

Ms is turning the ship around to get steam. It's 10 years too late and that's their preferred point of entry.

???????????

a major corporation is going to straight up lie about their plans for a feature? seriously name a time that a publicly traded corporation has done that...
 
And do you really think that many people would buy a new one every 2 years? 50 odd million people have bought a console with the belief it will last for the next few years / won't need to buy a new one till the next generation. Those that like to upgrade tend to get a PC. Those that like it nice and simple get a console (generally)

I'm thinking 3 years, and yes. I would buy a new box every 3 years as long as my old games still work and my friends list/interaction isn't walled.
 
Top Bottom