Xbox 720 / NeXtBox / Durango / Infinity

[The future]

Seriously?

yeah. Cause I figured out that if the PS3 was gonna be just better graphics than the PS2 with online play, I figured that all the consoles are gonna be like that and it will cost a lot more money than before. Like instead of paying $2-300 per console and $50 per games, now I would have been paying $4-600 for a console and $60 per game- all for the sake of better graphics and online gameplay. No new gameplay measures, very few new franchises, and more money out my pocket.

When the Wii came out and there were new ways of playing games, my interests went way up with the future of gaming. People just making better and better graphics with no innovation would have caused the downsizing of the gaming industry. What console sold the most in this generation when the Recession came? The Wii. What console gave the likes of the PS3 and 360 the inspiration to make the PS Move and Kinect? The Wii.

Thats why when I heard the 720 copying off of the Wii U, that just re-affirmed my opinion about the Wii giving new life to an industry that was about to be stagnant from graphics-whoring. That's why the Big N has my respect as much as SEGA, another innovator on the third party front.

[Ekaje]

Fucking Nintendo, ripping off Sony with a disk-playing console.

The "ripping off" stuff is dumb, and even in the cases where it is true, like with the 360 and PS3 getting motion controls later in their life, it isn't a big deal. When new ideas are introduced and proven to be successful, of course they're going to spread through the industry.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Ekaje

[Badnik Mechanic]

What console sold the most in this generation when the Recession came? The Wii. What console gave the likes of the PS3 and 360 the inspiration to make the PS Move and Kinect? The Wii

Edited February 12, 2012 by Hogfather

[Ferno]

The point of a HUD (Heads-Up-Display) is that it allows you to see important information without looking away from the action. Moving HUD's to a seperate controller means you have to breifly look away from the main screen. In strategy games and slow paced RPG's that could work fine, but in brawlers, action/adventures, platformers and shooters, looking away from the screen at any point is foolish. It could prove to be more of hinderance than something of actual value. That's all just speculation though, but I generally find it a hinderance to look away from the screen. The Wii U pad will primarily be used to stream the game to the screen to play said game without the TV.

The Vita's back touchpad is probably unecessary.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Inferno

[Conando]

I don't think that really works because, you can't see what's coming in any console Mario Kart game (you can hear it, though). So if the inevitable Mario Kart game on the Wii U uses the touch screen as additional warning, I don't see the issue.

[Scar]

I don't think that really works because, you can't see what's coming in any console Mario Kart game (you can hear it, though). So if the inevitable Mario Kart game on the Wii U uses the touch screen as additional warning, I don't see the issue.

The problem is developers using it because its there. Not actually putting any real thought as to what kind of information to have on the bottom screen, and just shoving the HUD down there because they feel the need, or are pressured by Nintendo into making use of the controllers' screen, even if it isn't that necessary.

[The Kid]

The problem is developers using it because its there. Not actually putting any real thought as to what kind of information to have on the bottom screen, and just shoving the HUD down there because they feel the need, or are pressured by Nintendo into making use of the controllers' screen, even if it isn't that necessary.

If it is something simple like putting a map on the bottom screen for certain games, then I'm all for it. That actually helps since I don't have to press start every few minutes to check the map to see where I need to go in a game like LOZ. But if developers do something like add a puzzle into a game where you have to quickly whip out the stylus (when every other part of the game uses the control pad) then I get pissed. Depending on the game, having the HUD on the bottom screen wouldn't be that bad, as long as it makes things like checking my inventory and map in a game easier.

But they need the Wii-U controller to help evolve games in fun and unique directions. That whole hide-and-seek game they showcased took advantage of the controller what seemed like an interesting way, for a mini-game at least. No doubt when the Wii-U first comes out there will be tons of games using the controller in a pointless way just like with the Wii. I just wish Nintendo will make some better choices this time around.

I really hope they let us use the Wii-U controller as just a controller for certain games, instead of relying on the touch screen. I'm all for innovation, but sometimes I want that same old controller feel.

[Conando]

The problem is developers using it because its there. Not actually putting any real thought as to what kind of information to have on the bottom screen, and just shoving the HUD down there because they feel the need, or are pressured by Nintendo into making use of the controllers' screen, even if it isn't that necessary.

Considering Nintendo never pressures developers into using their off-kilter features, I think it would be more on the 3rd party developers than them. That said, they're going to do it, they always do.

[Candescence]

Okay, sure, Microsoft may have torn a page out of Nintendo's book. Not surprised one bit.

However, there is one thing that gets me wondering... Why use that as a selling point? Unless Microsoft has something unique to make it stand out (Kinect does not count, nobody gives a shit about Kinect), well, the WiiU will seem like a cheaper option for consumers who won't see that much difference, not to mention the WiiU will have been out longer. Look at it this way. There's more than a few rumors pointing to the notion that the gap between the hardware power of the WiiU and next-gen MS and Sony consoles is going to be much smaller than it was this generation. Plus, with the WiiU apparently having the hardware capabilities on-par with higher-end PCs, it stands to reason that unless there's a sudden increase in PC hardware capabilities, the next XBox won't be a huge step up from the 360, no way.

And that's not even taking into account the wild card that is "Unlimited Detail", which, last I checked, gained quite a bit of evidence that it wasn't a scam around the time Euclideon turned up at Gamescom and won over the entire German gaming media as well the head of Crytek (speaking of which, Swiss, if you're reading this, change the topic title on that thread, it's misleading). Presuming that the next XBox will, at the earliest, release in two years, if Unlimited Detail proves to be the revolutionary technology that its developers claim it to be when its SDK is released by the end of this year, then it'll completely derail the entire graphics hardware race - after all, what'll be the point of getting a more expensive console if the cheaper one can render the same level of detail? Granted, GPUs aren't all about polygon count, but you get my point. Both the WiiU and the 3DS are poised to benefit most from Unlimited Detail, if it proves itself to be superior to polygons.

Really, regardless of when Microsoft and Sony release their next consoles, Nintendo has a rather favorable position.

Though, really, the whole graphics hardware war is bullshit anyway, because it's causing the industry to become increasingly unsustainable. The only way this industry can stop itself from self-imploding is to reduce game budgets, and make game prices cheaper, because, really, gaming is becoming a more and more expensive hobby, and games are becoming an increasingly risky prospect as far as sales go.

[Patticus]

There is clearly room for more than one touch-screen controller in the marketplace. While Nintendo is going down the Fischer Price aisle, picking family-friendly designs (and there is nothing inherently wrong with this approach), there is very obviously room for a suave, sleek, high-end-looking alternative. Couple an almost iPad/Galaxy Tab-esque feather light touch screen design with more traditional controller wings and button layouts on either side and you're onto a winner already. Right?

[Marcello]

(Kinect does not count, nobody gives a shit about Kinect),

Well, that's a load of shit.

[JezMM]

Fucking Nintendo, ripping off Sony with a disk-playing console.

I know you're joking, but, ironically, the Playstation started life as an add-on for the SNES, made collaboratively with Nintendo. So, lol.

[Scar]

I know you're joking, but, ironically, the Playstation started life as an add-on for the SNES, made collaboratively with Nintendo. So, lol.

Nintendo fucked themselves right over with the cancellation of that partnership, the PS1 destroyed the N64 which created the opportunity for the PS2 to once again destroy the Gamecube (and everything else frankly).....

[Patticus]

Nintendo fucked themselves right over with the cancellation of that partnership, the PS1 destroyed the N64 which created the opportunity for the PS2 to once again destroy the Gamecube (and everything else frankly).....

Then again, one could argue that Sony and Nintendo's separation and ultimate rivalry allowed for a reinvigoration of the industry that might not otherwise have occurred in quite the same fashion (indeed, stagnation and collapse may have followed if the status quo had been unchanged), and created an atmosphere of heated competition between the leading console manufacturers which lead directly to numerous amazing efforts of game development on both companies' platforms.

While the separation and Sony's rise also had a hand in driving Sega out of the market, that ill-fated company may well have dropped out regardless, as Sony's presence cannot be said with any degree of certainty to have caused Sega's internal xenophobic squabbles, or its financial, developmental and marketing mismanagement throughout the mid-late 1990s. Frankly, I think the company brought about its own destruction; it would've happened anyway.

Sony's rise gave many developers a way out from the oppression of working with Nintendo, the former big power of the industry, and might just have saved it. The subsequent lack of success for Nintendo led to a change of leadership which might otherwise have been more conservative, and that in time brought us to the Wii; another industry-wide shake-up of sorts.

Companies rising and falling and engaging in fierce competition on the way up and down, as well as companies dropping out and popping in, keeps the industry fresh and brings us the very best of gaming today. Without that turning-over, the whole caboodle might long ago have collapsed.

[Tornado]

The only thing the PS2 did was hasten Sega's inevitable fall. The Dreamcast was a rousing success and SoA and SoJ were already fighting about it by the end of 1999. There was a fundamental management issue there, and Sega needed to go third party to clear out all the arrogant fuckups they picked up towards the end of the Genny's life.

Unless Microsoft has something unique to make it stand out (Kinect does not count, nobody gives a shit about Kinect)

Nobody gives a shit about Move (which, fair enough. Sony never really cared either way). Kinect has been selling like it was made of gold.

And that's not even taking into account the wild card that is "Unlimited Detail", which, last I checked, gained quite a bit of evidence that it wasn't a scam around the time Euclideon turned up at Gamescom and won over the entire German gaming media as well the head of Crytek (speaking of which, Swiss, if you're reading this, change the topic title on that thread, it's misleading). Presuming that the next XBox will, at the earliest, release in two years, if Unlimited Detail proves to be the revolutionary technology that its developers claim it to be when its SDK is released by the end of this year, then it'll completely derail the entire graphics hardware race - after all, what'll be the point of getting a more expensive console if the cheaper one can render the same level of detail? Granted, GPUs aren't all about polygon count, but you get my point. Both the WiiU and the 3DS are poised to benefit most from Unlimited Detail, if it proves itself to be superior to polygons.

Voxel-based rendering is at least a decade away. Giving it a pretentious name and wasting government money on it isn't going to make it come any sooner.

yeah. Cause I figured out that if the PS3 was gonna be just better graphics than the PS2 with online play, I figured that all the consoles are gonna be like that and it will cost a lot more money than before. Like instead of paying $2-300 per console and $50 per games, now I would have been paying $4-600 for a console and $60 per game- all for the sake of better graphics and online gameplay. No new gameplay measures, very few new franchises, and more money out my pocket.

I could just as soon argue that taping Waggle to PS2 games and calling it innovation like oh-so-much of the Wii lineup is much worse.

That is, if you want to argue over straw.

People just making better and better graphics with no innovation would have caused the downsizing of the gaming industry. What console sold the most in this generation when the Recession came? The Wii.

This argument would only work if the PS360's combined sales were less than that of the Wii. They are in fact far higher.

Edited February 12, 2012 by Gilda

[The Kid]

Would 30 million units difference be considered far higher? That's the same gap between the Wii and 360 or Wii and PS3, and I don't really consider that "far higher." Sure it's millions of units, but that's only 4/3 the sale of Wii's. Seems like a bit of an exaggeration.

Also, I may not be the most informed about rendering, but what exactly is voxel-based rendering?

Edited February 13, 2012 by The Kid

[Scar]

Would 30 million units difference be considered far higher? That's the same gap between the Wii and 360 or Wii and PS3, and I don't really consider that "far higher." Sure it's millions of units, but that's only 4/3 the sale of Wii's. Seems like a bit of an exaggeration.

The point being made here, is that the Wii did NOT outsell the PS3 and 360 combined.

Also, I may not be the most informed about rendering, but what exactly is voxel-based rendering?

Using small point-sources in the vain of atoms, instead of polygons and textures. I of course butched the concept in my rather pathetic attempt at explaining it, but that is generally the idea. Each pixel on the screen represents a single "atom" of visual information, which therefore allows for "unlimited" detail because no textures have to be loaded or something like that.

[Jeffhog]

SO WE HEARD YOU LIKE SCREENS

[Detective Shadzter]

Xbox 720 has Blu-ray, 2 GPUs, always-on internet - Rumour

http://www.computera...nternet-rumour/

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Xbox 720 has Blu-ray, 2 GPUs, always-on internet - Rumour

http://www.computera...nternet-rumour/

And now they are having optimal discs? What makes this rumor even more bullocks is that Xbox 720 will have Bluray. I know Microsoft, we know Microsoft, over their DEAD bodies they will use Bluray. They make their own stuff.

Sad really they are posting these rumors which are not true just to get hits.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Ming Ming Love

[Tornado]

Blu-Ray is a perfectly logical thing for them to include in the next XBox.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Especially when some of their games need 2 Discs to play. Mass Effect 2 and 3 had you pop the disc 1 and disc 2 out at specific moments, and Blu-ray will limit that...of course, this coming from someone who's not too knowledgeable about Blu-ray beyond it storing more data.

[Tornado]

It stores more data, it would allow the next XBox to take away one of the main aspect limiting the 360's use as a multimedia hub compared to the PS3 (which the PS4 and next XBox will almost certainly be designed to continue what this generation started), Microsoft simply doesn't care that Blu Ray is Sony's baby (and considering how little effort they put into supporting HD-DVD, they arguably didn't care in 2005), and Microsoft isn't the type of company that is so cheap that they will put a fully-functioning Blu Ray player into the system and then disable Blu Ray playback.

I'm not saying that the system will definitely use Blu Ray, but there is no real reason that it wouldn't.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Tornado

[Conando]

Blu ray or other some such high capacity optical disc would be the best decision for Microsoft, so I could seem them biting the bullet or pulling a Wii U Optical Disc. As for the other stuff...Jesus, where do people come up with this shit?

[Dobkeratops]

If Microsoft doesn't have BR playback their intent on making Xbox a living room centerpiece is already fucked, so time to bite the pillow, admit that Sony was right and catch up on optical media. Maybe this time around their users won't have to deal with terrible disc swap mechanics and Sony console users don't have to put up with horrible, vomit inducing jpeg macroblocking codecs in multiplat games. Jesus fuck, everytime I see the Bink logo I know I'm in for a ride. No excuses now, get rid of that shitty middleware.

Two GPUs thing is probably related to the devkits, which are using temporary architecture while the hardware gets finalized. 360 devkits at some point also used dual cards. A 720 having two decent cards in a PC-like setup would be unfeasible (>$500 and red rings everywhere kind of unfeasible), unless one of them was very low powered and reserved for OS/Kinect things.

The always online DRM thing again... is scary. I'm hoping it's the new fad for console rumors and everyone's throwing it at the wall to see if it sticks, rather than having actual substance. One-time activations I can take as a Steam user, but all the goddamn time? So the game stops working if you disconnect during a game Ubi-style? No thanks, bro.