Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Called it: Microsoft officially getting out of the console game!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Not_Sure, Aug 22, 2016.

  1. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    Looks like they're going all in against Steam.
     
  2. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,083
    ...Did you actually watch the video or read the interview? They never said they're getting out of the console game, they said that there won't be console generations as there are now and that there'll be a greater focus on hardware iteration.

    edit: for people who are too lazy to watch the video or find the original article:
    https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/17/microsoft-aaron-greenberg-qa-project-scorpio-vr/

    Emphasis mine.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2016
    chelnok, TwiiK, Dustin-Horne and 7 others like this.
  3. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    So what they are saying is they need to better design for modular HW that can be iterated through upgrades that won't be the drain on profit as is the selling complete consoles like the XBox One.
     
  4. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    Where's the talk about modularity? (Haven't watched the video.)

    Iteration doesn't necessarily mean reusing physical devices. By using standard x86-compatible hardware they're allowing consoles to have the same kind of backward/forward compatability that PCs have enjoyed for decades. And now that PCs have shaken off some of their earlier technologies that'll probably be more stable (for everyone) moving forward.

    In other words, because both MS and Sony are using relatively standard hardware in current consoles, there's no reason that Xbox N+1 and Playstation N+1 can't also conform to the same standards, and thus be compatible with existing software and accessories. Honestly, at this point they're small, mass-produced, single-board cheap PCs with custom presentation.

    Microsoft already dominates a platform where hardware is sold as swappable modules and enthusiasts can build their own machines (the PC), they don't need to complicate their consoles by doing the same there.

    Edited: Included a missing word.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2016
    gian-reto-alig and Ryiah like this.
  5. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
  6. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I watched less than 30 seconds and then clicked @Murgilod's link. ;) I still felt I should point out that I didn't watch the video just in case it had other stuff as well.
     
    Martin_H and zombiegorilla like this.
  7. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    It's seems about the right time for this type of move.

    Console tech is pretty much saturated. There is not much point to push more expensive tech into the box. Gamers aren't going to get much of a better experience for it.

    Manufacturers could start betting heavily on VR tech. But it's still iffy if that will go anywhere.
     
    Ryiah likes this.
  8. Meltdown

    Meltdown

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Posts:
    5,816
    Now if only someone could invent a $99 mini-console that outputs 4k :p
     
  9. QFSW

    QFSW

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2015
    Posts:
    2,906
    Give it 10 years and I wont even be suprised if its a thing
     
  10. yoonitee

    yoonitee

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2013
    Posts:
    2,363
    Modularity in an XBOX? So basically.... a PC?
     
  11. Schneider21

    Schneider21

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Posts:
    3,512
    My understanding of MS's position on this is much more along the lines of what @angrypenguin is saying: Instead of having separate generations of hardware (Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One), they'll be going for more of a single Xbox platform, with iterations of hardware improvement every few years.

    I suspect the software support will work more closely to the way the App Store does: I can buy an iOS game that may work on iPhone 5s and above. Probably get better performance out of a newer phone, but it's still compatible with the older device. For technical reasons, a game may not work on devices several versions older. I would say this would need to be clear on the packaging to avoid consumers buying a game and getting home to discover they can't play it, but I also suspect MS will be moving towards a digital-only platform sooner rather than later.

    I feel like this actually works better for developers, too. Instead of trying to release two or more entirely different versions of a game for the different gen hardware, they can have a single app that scales itself depending on where it's running. Maybe. I guess for your bigger titles, you'd want separate versions if you're talking wholly different texture packs and stuff.
     
    Perrydotto and Ryiah like this.
  12. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Comments on the article are suggesting the same thing and I have to agree that it isn't referring to modularity at all. Currently improvements are coming every seven to eight years but it wouldn't surprise me if we started seeing them every two or three years. If they can reduce the costs enough to allow people to justify upgrading more often it might work out.
     
  13. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    I imagine TV set manufacturers will start manufacturing plugin Android modules for game play, browsing, and the like. Every two years your pull the Android Gaming module out of your TV and get a new one provided the tech makes it worth your while. Or the $25 Android TV Box. It's hard to argue that the PlayStation and XBox game consoles are worth $500 more technically than those Android TV Boxes.

    Really the Gaming Consoles technically aren't offering all that much any more especially when you consider the price.
     
  14. Murgilod

    Murgilod

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    10,083
    Nobody is going to make modular anything because modules are more complicated than "it just works."
     
    RavenOfCode likes this.
  15. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    This is my thinking, too, and it's one of the advantages of a single-vendor system. With an iPhone or and iPad there are two numbers that matter - the hardware version and the OS version. Both are marketed pretty heavily, so customers know about the number even if they don't understand the underlying stuff. Compare that to the "Minimum System Requirements" defacto system we have for PC games...

    Aren't phones getting pretty close? I wouldn't be surprised if there were already models that could do so. And considering how rapidly mobile hardware is improving compared to desktop hardware... well, it's a part of the reason that I think increased iteration speed in console hardware is a good idea.

    Consoles might be comparatively powerful when they're released, but who thinks that even the current round of consoles will last a full 7 years without mobile devices effectively catching up? And with that in mind, almost everyone already has a phone, and if that phone can display on a TV and is capable of playing similarly good looking games...

    I don't know if it's likely, but it'd be sweet if mobile devices also got in on that same standardisation bandwagon, because then they could eventually play (older) non-mobile titles. (I think Sony gave that a go and it didn't take off, but the tech they were building off wasn't originally designed with that in mind.)
     
    Ryiah and Schneider21 like this.
  16. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    Sorry I'm just now getting back to this. And thank you, that link is a lot more helpful than "The Know" (I just happened to see it and have my tablet handy).

    Anyway, what I'm getting from this is that they're going to do a steam-box thing.

    They'll make their own console here or there and let others manufacture systems. But they'll all run on the same OS, a closed version of windows that only runs things from the windows store.

    I mean that's ultimate goal, isn't it?

    To make all windows systems a locked down system that will only play things from their store.

    Meanwhile, the moment the system does not require a controller for games it is no longer a console (IMO). It's just a pc that you can't do what you want with.

    So all the problems that plague PC is going to plague the "console". Namely rampant cheating, a ridiculous minimal skill level for entry, and a lack of "couch-a-bility". If you want to play online shooters you need a keyboard and mouse to keep up, so I hope you weren't looking to play laid back on your couch split screen with a friend.

    But I do think this is ultimately a quiet retreat from the console market.

    They took a bath on the first Xbox, losing billions. Then the 360 barely made a profit. And now the Xbox One looks like it's losing money.

    MS is a publically traded company and the share holders are most likely not happy about the performance of the Xbox brand and it's time to bail.

    If they were smarter they should have struck a deal five years ago with Sony and made a collaboration. After all, these consoles are sold at a loss and that would be a lot less money out of consumers' and their own pockets.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2016
    RavenOfCode likes this.
  17. gian-reto-alig

    gian-reto-alig

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Posts:
    756

    That is pretty much how I understand the situation.

    All they are saying that 10 years down the line, on the XBOX Three, or whatever the 3rd or 4th iteration of the XBOX One will be called, you cn still play your XBOX One games you bought in 2014, because its JUST A GLORIFIED GAMING PC! With quite middling specs for its release window, but at a great price.

    So basically they are telling people that they no longer have to buy into a closed off ecosystem and be locked there for 5-7 years, without the hardware power increasing, and when finally newer hardware comes out, they have to either chuck their old games and rebuy them later for a virtual console, or keep an ever increasing amount of big black/grey boxes below the TV just to play their old games.
    Of course the are also flipping a big middle finger to devs that until now only had to deal with a single hardware level. Porting to other consoles becomes easier, but given the rules are similar for XBOX Scorpio as they currently seem to be for PS4 Neo, that means everyone needs to juggle 2 quite different settings now. 3 maybe 2-3 years down the line. At which point is a dev allowed to no longer support old console hardware in this brave new world?
    And for players it could mean that devs try less hard to make a game look their best and run at acceptable framerates still on older console versions... because they will show off their game on the latest and greatest, which starting from this year will be PS4 Neo for the Sony ecosystem, and starting from next year will be project scorpio for the MS ecosystem. The time the dev needed to make a new game shine on the old system will now most probably go into building two different builds, and polishing the high spec build for the Neo/Scorpio so they have something to show off.


    Meh. I couldn't care less. I am a longtime Playstation fan, passed on the PS4 until now. There are just nowhere near enough compelling games I cannot get over steam, and the controller support in PC games is picking up as of lately.
    If consoles become nothing more than cheap and cheerful gaming PCs for the masses, well, good for me. That means less incentive to buy a shiny new console at launch as games will have a bigger chance of being ported over to PC and Game controllers now universally working on PC too, even if sometimes only with thirdparty utilities.
    But if it on the other hands means ported games staying more up to date thanks to quicker hardware upgrade cycles on the console side, I am all for it.
    As a PC gamer, buying a 400 bucks midrange gaming PC that is guaranteed to stay relevant for at least 2-3 years is actually terrific. So I really embrace this change in the way the console makers do business.

    Just because Tim Sweeney went into fits over this idea of his does not make it the truth.

    I guess he has a point that it MIGHT happen. He also might have a point that some MS bigwig might have though of it before. They MIGHT even have had this in mind when they copied Apples way to lock down their ecosystem (which to my knowledge didn't really work on Mac OS nearly as well as it did on iOS).
    It does not look however like that idea is working out fine in the nearer future given how little traction the Windows App Store got, or UWP in general. And really, MS would be suicidal to try to hard to make it work.

    Most people think Tim is either extremly pessimistic, or has some other beef with MS and is abusing this topic for ranting against them.
    The day MS closes down their ecosystem is the day Windows will die. Being a more or less open system any dev can build for, that allows for competing storefronts and indie publishers to sell their software on their own, AND is backward compatible to extremly old legacy software is the reason why windows is still the go to OS for both bussiness users and gamers.

    I understant that some companys are worried about the amount of leverage MS still holds over them. Yet unless they REALLY get into the OS games, and are not trying to do things the easy way by just chucking Linux on their Steam Machines and hoping for profit, I think nothing will change on this front.


    Oh, and as far as I understood it Xbox 360 did pretty well for them. The Xbox one did poorly because of their own fault, and I would bet the Xbox division knows that it could have at least rivalled or even surpassed the PS4 without the prerelease missteps.

    If anything, the Xbox division will slowly shift its focus away from solely creating console hardware and a software ecosystem for that, and more supporting the PC as a gaming division, with the Xbox console being the lowend price sweet spot hardware for price sensitive gamers and the less well informed masses.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2016
    RavenOfCode likes this.
  18. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    On the flip side developers will no longer have to learn esoteric platform designs and ways to take full advantage of them only to throw away that knowledge a generation later. Less time will have to be sunk into developing engines since they will only be gaining marginal improvements with each hardware iteration. Games will have longer life spans too.

    Having to deal with multiple hardware tiers is a very minor inconvenience when you compare it to the advantages.
     
    gian-reto-alig likes this.
  19. gian-reto-alig

    gian-reto-alig

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Posts:
    756
    Guess that is true for many devs that develop for multiple platforms. For dedicated devs it was less of a problem. Having to learn a completly new platform every 5-7 years seemed to have been a nuisance, as long as you can concentrate on that one platform, I guess having to adapt for 1-2 years is less of a nuisance then having to juggle multiple hardware tiers for the full cycle.

    Of course, as soon as the dev is developing for multiple console platforms, or has to juggle multiple hardware tiers for their PC version anyway (which most often enough, was outsourced because of that to some second tier dev, and pushed out unoptimized), you are right, that multiple hardware tiers might be the better deal compared to obscure power PC CPU configs with SPUs and custom or even noexisting middleware.
     
  20. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    Maybe it has more to do with the way Xbox 360 compatibility works on Xbox One today: a new rev is hardware that is sufficiently powerful to emulate the previous gen...
     
  21. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    I'm not sure that devs see games having a longer life cycle as a good thing.

    Gotta sell them remastered copies and all.

    Last of Us and Skyrim come to mind.
     
    MV10 likes this.
  22. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Remastering a game is far easier when you don't have to rebuild it from the ground up to support new hardware.
     
    gian-reto-alig and Dustin-Horne like this.
  23. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    Okay, true.
     
  24. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,860
    Long tail economics. The existing game will continue to sell for a long time as long as people can still play it. You can still buy and play Diablo 2 or the original Starcraft. And these cost Blizzard very little to maintain.

    On the other hand it's virtually impossible to buy and play Golden Eye. Rerelease get a remastered version for a modern platform is not exactly cheap.
     
    gian-reto-alig and Ryiah like this.
  25. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    Except that the compatibility lists are always so small...
     
  26. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    I don't know how many titles you own, but the list is in the hundreds and has pretty good coverage over my collection of 360 games. The list was updated just yesterday so they continue to patch. All for games and an OS that was never designed or intended to be emulated -- quite the opposite given many of the oddball anti-piracy hardware "features" of the 360.

    Plus there is the fact that Microsoft is busting out cross-platform in a huge way right now. That kind of mindset is hugely amenable to backwards compatibility (or emulation when necessary).
     
  27. TwiiK

    TwiiK

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Posts:
    1,729
    Thanks for the article, didn't actually see a link on the video page. :)

    Watching someone who knows way less about a subject than myself try to interpret and explain an article to me is my favorite pastime... NOT. And I instantly recognized "The Know" from an equally inept video about them trying to understand the multiplayer drama surrounding No Man's Sky. :p
     
  28. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I just remember a few weeks ago trying out games from my 360 collection, and two of them working.
    Along with standardised hardware it should remove the need for emulation.
     
  29. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    When console generations are 7 or 8 years at a stretch, I'm not sure what "standardized hardware" really means. In 2009 the new GPU hotness was the ATI 5970 at 256GB/s bandwidth... 7 years later the ATI 400 series will be out shortly at 1TB/s bandwidth. No, consoles don't match top-end PC hardware but the scaling is pretty similar (or at least, relevant when you're talking order-of-magnitude improvements -- and of course GPU bandwidth is just one factor among many).

    For desktop-OS, yeah, dealing with that hardware is going to be highly standardized -- and yes they're sort of moving to a similar model for their consoles -- but at the end of the day a console OS is going to milk their highly specific actual physical hardware for every ounce of performance, and by the time you get to your next major rev, backwards compatibility is going to require some level of emulation. Because on a 4 or 7 or 9 year timeline a whole bunch changes at that level.

    Possibly "emulation" is too strong, but I feel it's also more than just "patch"...

    But again, pure speculation.
     
  30. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    "Standardised hardware" is referring to the facts that:
    - I can plug either of those video cards you mentioned into the same motherboard. This isn't just about the physical plug (that's sometimes omitted, like in laptops), but also the general methods of communication between pieces of hardware.
    - They will work fine with (almost) anything else plugged into that same motherboard.
    - They both operate with the same OSes, APIs and such that are written against the standard that the hardware was built to.

    You're right that internally there are significant changes and that as a result performance has increased hugely between those two models. Nonetheless, the interfaces through which they interact with other hardware (and ultimately software, too) are compatible with one another. Software written for the earlier will generally work with the latter. Also, software written with the latter can easily work with the earlier, except where it uses features that don't exist.

    You see this all the time when running software on PCs. Adobe don't need to rewrite Photoshop every time a new CPU hits the market. And consoles have much less hardware variation than PCs.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2016
    gian-reto-alig and Ryiah like this.
  31. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    Yeah I understand the point your making but over generational timeframes it doesn't necessarily hold true. For example, PCI, PCI-X, AGP, and PCI-E are the four types of graphics card slots that have spanned the Xbox, Xbox 360, and Xbox One generations. So no, you can't necessarily plug them in. And lets not even get started on all the CPU socket form factors. Or memory.

    Yes software has better compatibility (which is why it exists, after all), but there again Word or Photo Shop isn't exactly chasing game-style performance, which has been my point all along.

    If it were easy to do, we'd have had 360 compatibility much earlier (I read somewhere that MS worked on compatibility for more than two years) and you'd have more working games already.
     
  32. gian-reto-alig

    gian-reto-alig

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Posts:
    756
    I think the point was that its just like playing the witcher 1, or maybe Diablo 2 now on PC. It just works.

    Yes, at some point you run into troubles, mostly because of oddities of older titles (like the framerate being directly linked to the power of the CPU/GPU, which made old XCOM titles so hard to play on newer machines), or the devs from way back just not being able to see into the future (like when games only supported 4:3 aspect ratios), and the OSes and screens of today no longer really trying to catch that (thus old games being forced into widescreen aspect ratios by default).

    But given you have someone behind the platform that does care, that shouldn't really be a problem. (After all, that aspect ratio thingy was most probably not that hard to solve given the OS would have brought some special code that would automatically switch the aspect ratio and emulate a 4:3 screen for old games ran on newer screens which do not support non-widescreen input... the locked framerate issue would be more involved to solve, but some virtualization layers might fix that).

    Supporting backward compatibility between machines with vastly different architectures is on a whole other level than just making sure you catch some of the edge cases when running 10+ year old games on todays hardware.
    Its not only the PowerPC <-> x86 conversion, but also potential SPUs which differ between consoles.
    Oddly enough the original XBOX did use a Pentium III based CPU, which means that original XBOX games might be actually easier to port for the XBOX One than XBOX 360 titles (PowerPC CPU).

    Of course there is the OS and middleware layer, the original XBOX didn't use a Windows OS like the XBOX One does, which will make porting harder again.
    Given all the new XBOX consoles in the future use a slightly modified Windows OS, and that Windows keeps the backward compatibility it always had down the line, and given they stay with x86 hardware, I would bet you no longer need to port ANYTHING to a newer XBOX console.
    Which might make the "we would have 360 compatibility much earlier" point moot in the future. Its compatible by default.
     
    Kiwasi and angrypenguin like this.
  33. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    In reality, knowing Microsoft, this is probably just another pure-marketing move. Just like Win10 is supposedly the end of discrete releases, they may be hoping to plant the seed of the same concept with console generations. It takes a lot of pressure off them if the general consumer buys into the "it's all one product" hype, even though folks like us know internally there are still version numbers everywhere.

    MS Marketing drives some of the goofiest and most annoying decisions I've ever seen, so when something doesn't make sense, I try to blame them first. :)
     
  34. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    That's a point for what I'm saying, not against it - it doesn't work "easily" with the 360 specifically because that console wasn't built against the standards we're talking about now.
     
  35. CarterG81

    CarterG81

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,773
    In time, will any of this even matter? When would the next gen of consoles even be released? 2021?

    By then things may change radically.

    I honestly can't wait for HDD's to become obsolete (replaced by RAM or a new RAM-like tech). That will be such a big game-changer, for PC's, for Consoles, for Microsoft. For gamedev, for mobile.

    It's what I'm most excited for in technology - besides better drones & a tiny bit in augmented reality for non-gaming apps (ex. augmented reality text editor). If you think VR is the next big thing, I have a bridge made in 1968 to sell you. I would be surprised if that even makes a dent in the industry.

    And if you think any pledges made today by Microsoft will apply by 2021 (the time in which the Xbox 2 would be released)? Maybe if the claims of hardware companies of releasing new tech is exaggerated/false, then maybe.

    Then again, it's all just computers anyway...no reason they couldn't have always done "modular" upgrades of the same system. The "Next Gen Xbox" that uses any new technology will be more than capable of running Xbox 1 & 360 titles, so I guess this may be legit news that they're going "modular".

    In the end though? It's just semantics. An Xbox 360 can run Xbox games. An Xbox One can run 360 games. Whether or not they allow it or create the software required to do so is another thing. The more powerful the machine, the more it can do. Because it's just yet another computer, that lags behind the "PC master race" (because it always does.)

    Microsoft did some crappy attempts at bringing in Console users with PC gamers, and that was an obvious failure the moment the idea was created, but that doesn't mean they can't eventually unify together. They do own PC gaming. People forget that as big a monopoly as Valve has over PC gaming (a monopoly that has already begun to fade), all those Steam users still use a copy of Windows to play their games. Steam's "SteamBox", Steam O/S, and the entire linux niche is and has always been a total joke in the gaming world. What a failure...
    Windows is the gaming O/S, and they seem to want to keep it that way. (Whether you like that or not). And since Valve failed so hard to challenge them, I don't think anyone will anytime in the near future. They're pretty safe.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2016
  36. CarterG81

    CarterG81

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,773
    While you're right that it's all just semantics & trickery, since it's all just 1's & 0's and the hardware that supports them (which have version numbers & physical limitations, respectively), there is more to it than mere marketing.

    Usability is a big deal.

    Consoles are successful because they are so much more "usable". People don't have to worry about the common headaches of PC gaming.

    I'm not saying Microsoft is smart enough to realize how important Usability is (they could be doing this entirely as a marketing ploy, so they can trick users into transitioning into PC gaming via a MicrosoftBox (an actually successful SteamBox), but they COULD be trying to merge the "Best of Both Worlds".

    They'd have to do this very carefully, but to combine the strength of Console's simplicity & usability, with the power & upgradeability of PC? Without the negatives of convoluted crap? Well that's similar to what Apple does. And it works. Very, very well.

    So Microsoft may just be trying to "Apple" their Xbox. To clarify what I mean:

    Xbox: There is only one type. It plays Xbox games. Full Control on the market.
    PC: There are infinite types. Nearly infinite potential. Very convoluted User experience.
    Apple: There are a few types. It does everything a PC can do. Tight Control on the market. Closer to PC than XBOX, with many of the same Benefits of a Console: Better Usability, User Experience, Simplified Support, Higher Price (Profits)
    Microsoft: We should "Apple" our Xbox.

    Obviously later on Consoles added apps like a Web Browser, Netflix, Youtube, etc. but you get the idea.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2016
  37. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Well those games consoles are really just the sort of closed systems that iOS and Android are. You have to root those to cause yourself big OS headaches.

    When this UWP and Windows 10 Universal thing shakes out Microsoft will be in very good shape to release a $100 gaming console that you plug into your TV and insert a RO SD cart into to play a video game or download from the internet. Basically a close PC that is inexpensive and can't be messed up easily but the best graphics tech needs to become commodity priced after a year or so to make than economical. It's certainly more economical then all the high-speed tech they cram into 5" phones and 7" tablets. Already, if I had a TV or monitor that would do 4K I have an Android TV Box that would output 4K. That Android TV box cost less than $30 and plugs into TV with standard HMDI connector and uses a Android Game Controller that cost nearly as much as the Android TV Box! It manages to even output HD to a FHD TV on a cruddy streaming 256K cable internet connection and it look good (the 'big if' being all the hops are uncongested enough for my Android TV box to stream at 256KBS).

    So then judging on the price of the Android TV Box and the Android Game Controller, they expect console gamers to pay high prices. The cost of the components between the two aren't even close.
     
  38. tedthebug

    tedthebug

    Joined:
    May 6, 2015
    Posts:
    2,570
    I just want a platform that lets me buy games & play them & not need to worry if it will work on the configuration of my machine. That's the main reason why I prefer console to PC gaming, if I buy an xbox1 game (unless it is a majorly stuffed release) it will work on my machine. I got sick of needing to get someone to upgrade my PC every year to play new games.

    Edit: This is probably why I spend more time gaming on iPad than anything else these last few years.
     
    MV10, CarterG81 and Kiwasi like this.
  39. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    You must be playing some very demanding (or you're on a low budget) video games. I've been able to play every game I've thrown at my computer at maximum settings with no major performance penalties and most of my computer's components are at the same age as a console generation now. I did swap out my graphics card a few months back but that's trivial to do.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2016
    Kiwasi and Perrydotto like this.
  40. N1warhead

    N1warhead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Posts:
    3,884
    How do any of you ever finish your games? Always on da' forums haha.
     
  41. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Wait, this is a forum for game development? :eek:
     
  42. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    Because we all speed-type like l33t h4x0rz.

     
    Ryiah and Deon-Cadme like this.
  43. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Some of us used to... but then we got RSI. :(
     
    MV10 likes this.
  44. Not_Sure

    Not_Sure

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Posts:
    3,546
    This is a great idea.

    They could put ram sticks in interchangeable plastic cases.

    Oh, wait...
    :p
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2016
  45. MV10

    MV10

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,889
    Do you have a phone with a hard drive? No, of course not -- which is also why it won't be a game-changer when large quantities of fast-enough NVRAM become affordable for your run-of-the-mill PC (or console) usage: we're already there. Android, iOS, Windows Phone, they already work with the "one big chunk of memory" model, and the change-over went relatively unnoticed.
     
  46. Gametyme

    Gametyme

    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    Posts:
    618
    Basically what they said is all future xbox consoles will be fully compatible with all current xbox one games and accessories.
     
  47. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,958
    Just needs a standardized port though USB might be a bit too slow. :p

    expansion.jpg

    Did you know that Samsung once had phones with hard drives embedded in them?

    http://www.phonearena.com/news/Did-...cell-phones-with-built-in-hard-drives_id65206

    A hard drive doesn't have to be monstrous either. Toshiba has made them as small as 0.85-inch.

    https://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2004_03/pr1601.htm

    It's ridiculous now with the advances we've made in non-volatile memory but we didn't always have that.
     
    Not_Sure likes this.
  48. Nossgrr

    Nossgrr

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Posts:
    34
    Microsoft's xbox division is one of their very profitable divisions, they're not dumping it anytime soon. Its evolving, thats all.
     
  49. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,441
    That's speed typing? lol

    Once I was given a typing speed test and I hit 93 words per minute with a 97% accuracy. That was many years ago now and I imagine I have slowed down since that time. Anyway, I never thought about it before but maybe this is why I much prefer pure programming (type, type, type) and consider it the fastest way to develop games.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2016
  50. CarterG81

    CarterG81

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    1,773
    That's incorrect. I forget the name of the tech (tried to find a link) but when you have ram with TB's of space, you have no need for HDD space. Ever again.

    That changes the very foundation of how programming & game engines work.

    Memory Management changes. That's kindof a big deal in computer programming.

    You will never run out of memory, when it's in the TB's.

    Instead of loading textures into memory, you just load textures instantly from the HDD.

    The HDD is the slowest part of computers & a pain in the butt. Not just mechanical harddrives, but SSD included. Ram is much faster.

    And phones have very small amounts of space, are more expensive, and often have SD cards to give more space. I dont know the specs, but we are certainly NOT already there.

    I don't pretend to be am expert on this, but any programmer that knows their stuff understabds how big a change getting rid of the HDD & expanding ram to TB's is.

    It is not even close to a console video game or smartphone.
     
    angrypenguin likes this.