The Next XBox - Rumour Thread

richymcdermott

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/339324/xbox-720-wont-have-a-disc-drive-report/

Temptamperu

Eh F**k that. I as a games hoarder hate this plan and if its kinect type controller only, I am going Sony.

Zeouterlimits

Rumour would be a better title than report imo.

Considering our retail 360 games aren't tied to our accounts like Steam, it would be insanity. With Halo 4 and GTAV coming out this year (we'll see about GTA), it would be crazy to come out in 2013 and not be able to be able to play your copy.

The PS4 being so different to PS3 worries me that they won't be able to emulate it and therefore no BC there either. Of course a more traditional hardware style and API support, like that in the Vita, is a much much better idea, and will no doubt lead to better ports.

Andy!!

Zeouterlimits wrote: »

Rumour would be a better title than report imo.

Considering our retail 360 games aren't tied to our accounts like Steam, it would be insanity. With Halo 4 and GTAV coming out this year (we'll see about GTA), it would be crazy to come out in 2013 and not be able to be able to play your copy.

If you read the article, it does mention some way of getting your 360 games on there possibly using some kind of HDD transfer.

It's certainly a good idea from the point of view of nerfing the 2nd hand market. Interesting, anyways.

Overheal

From the Gob of Gabe:

So, you know, people were worried when we started using Steam initially because, oh my gosh, if I don’t have my discs what happens when I get a new machine? And after they’ve done this a couple times they’re like “oh my god, this is so much better, I’m so much more likely [...] to lose my discs than I am to have any problem with my Steam account, that seems way better than having a physical token that I use to access my content.”

drunkmonkey

Andy!! wrote: »

It's certainly a good idea from the point of view of nerfing the 2nd hand market. Interesting, anyways.

There going to stimulate the second hand market with a foam football?

sink

There are a number of reasons I see this is a likely possibility.

1. A propriety flash storage format will be extremely hard to pirate.
2. Flash memory is dirt cheap compared to what it used to be, when buying in bulk wholesale prices for 8gb chips are just a few dollars and falling all the time.
3. Games can still be sold through shops as well as downloaded.
4. Flash memory is writeable allowing Microsoft to permanently link games to accounts and eliminate the second hand market.
5. Microsoft has no interest in Blu-Ray, unlike Sony it stands to make no profit out of the sale of a Blu-ray film.
6. Streaming a film directly a Microsoft console however provides tidy little income stream. Without the option of Blu-Ray people are more likely to use the streaming services available.

I don't think it's a good thing for consumers but it's definitely an attractive option for Microsoft.

calex71

As others have pointed out in other threads over and over again, this quite simply won't happen.

Up to 50% of xboxs are not online, people have slow broadband and low data caps and so on. If they went the digital only route then they would lose half of their install base.

A lot of thinks need to change before a digital content only xbox emerges, and that is not going to change by the time they release the next generation console.

Andy!!

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There going to stimulate the second hand market with a foam football?

No, they are going to kill it with one.

sink

People are getting confused.

No optical disk drive /= download only

There are other formats available, namely flash memory.

Myrddin

sink wrote: »

People are getting confused.

No optical disk drive /= download only

There are other formats available, namely flash memory.

Flash memory versus 50GB dual layer Blu-Rays? No contest.

sink

EnterNow wrote: »

Flash memory versus 50GB dual layer Blu-Rays? No contest.

Few games on PS3 use more than 30GB. The maximum capacity of a single flash chip is currently 128GB and doubles every year with theoretical limits of many TB's, while prices continuously fall. You can put more than one chip in a cartridge. Read speeds and access times are infinitely faster with flash.

ScumLord

calex71 wrote: »

As others have pointed out in other threads over and over again, this quite simply won't happen.

Up to 50% of xboxs are not online, people have slow broadband and low data caps and so on. If they went the digital only route then they would lose half of their install base.

A lot of thinks need to change before a digital content only xbox emerges, and that is not going to change by the time they release the next generation console.

Just because 50% of people don't currently have their xbox connected to the internet doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't do it if they wanted to does it?

I'm sure their intention is to target the western countries where they can get guaranteed sales.

Overheal

also think ahead to two years from now. and look two years behind. Ireland enjoys internet speeds right now that you wouldn't have been able to imagine 5 years ago.

Andy!!

sink wrote: »

Few games on PS3 use more than 30GB. The maximum capacity of a single flash chip is currently 128GB and doubles every year with theoretical limits of many TB's, while prices continuously fall. You can put more than one chip in a cartridge. Read speeds and access times are infinitely faster with flash.

Bring back carts!!!!!!!!

I'm all for this now.

Hope I get to blow into them if they start reading incorrectly :cool:

I would like to see this happen, because I have a good connection and could download GBs in a few hours.

However, if they offered games for download, they should reduce the price. Right now, the prices of games on Xbox Live Games on Demand are crazy! In some cases is €29.99 for a two year old game I can get for €10-15 pre-owned, and then install that to the hard drive...

Antar Bolaeisk

Overheal wrote: »

also think ahead to two years from now. and look two years behind. Ireland enjoys internet speeds right now that you wouldn't have been able to imagine 5 years ago.

Yes we would have, we were longingly looking across the sea to England gobsmacked at their seemingly speed of light downloads on amazing 10Mb lines

I don't think the next generation of consoles will be download only but I do think there will be an emphasis on downloading and I also think you'll start to see games tied to accounts with the next generation.

Also, with regards to speed 3Mb/s is fairly okay for downloading games on Steam so long as I leave it over night (it works out as approximately 1GB/hour) but it is a pain when there's no pre-load and you're stuck waiting to play your shiney new game.

To the hoarders who think they could never live without their boxes, believe me when I say you can and you will. You'll also catch yourself wondering why you ever needed the bloody things in the first place.

hightower1

I read on another site that the base model will be cards only but a more expensive version of the console will have an optical drive. Seems a bit silly tbh you doubling you manufacturing costs doing it this way.

Im all for cards though as we still have a physical media to trade in BUT no matter how cheap flash cards have become their still no where near as cheap as the CD or blu rays. The read , access and write speeds are far faster than blu ray and cd but the cost is cripling thats why Nintendo moved away from them.

Helix

calex71 wrote: »

Up to 50% of xboxs are not online, people have slow broadband and low data caps and so on. If they went the digital only route then they would lose half of their install base.
.

ok that number needs to be looked at

50% of sold xboxes are not connected to xbox live, that's the number, and it's there for all to see. however, how many of those 50% of xboxes are dead? based on this report from kotaku http://kotaku.com/5339555/report-xbox-360-failure-rate-over-50-percent you're looking at a FIFTY PERCENT failure rate of the console in august 2009. now obviously that's not an exact figure for the full sales numbers, BUT there's a good chance that the vast majority of those 50% of xbox consoles in the wild that aren't on xbox live are dead boxes

calex71

Helix wrote: »

ok that number needs to be looked at

50% of sold xboxes are not connected to xbox live, that's the number, and it's there for all to see. however, how many of those 50% of xboxes are dead? based on this report from kotaku http://kotaku.com/5339555/report-xbox-360-failure-rate-over-50-percent you're looking at a FIFTY PERCENT failure rate of the console in august 2009. now obviously that's not an exact figure for the full sales numbers, BUT there's a good chance that the vast majority of those 50% of xbox consoles in the wild that aren't on xbox live are dead boxes

Thats a fair point actually

Myrddin

Having no optical drive just gives the competition an immediate advantage with dvd/blu ray. It's ridiculous to cut off the selling point, if only that.

Yeah few PS3 games use more than 30GB, but don't forget this is next-gen we're talking about. Proprietary flash memory, & it would be proprietary for security reasons, would be just too expensive for the sized needed.

They should have an optical drive, & even if they made it so that games had to be installed to the internal hdd, at least the console could compete with other 'media center of your living room' consoles

sink

hightower1 wrote: »

I read on another site that the base model will be cards only but a more expensive version of the console will have an optical drive. Seems a bit silly tbh you doubling you manufacturing costs doing it this way.

Im all for cards though as we still have a physical media to trade in BUT no matter how cheap flash cards have become their still no where near as cheap as the CD or blu rays. The read , access and write speeds are far faster than blu ray and cd but the cost is cripling thats why Nintendo moved away from them.

Nintendo moved away from cartridges with the Gamecube in 2001. That's 11 years ago and will be 12 years by the time we get a glimpse of the next gen consoles. In the past 12 years the technology has changed completely. The N64 only had something like a maximum capacity of 16MB, compared to 700mb of a CD. And back then the cost of producing a 16mb chip was a lot dearer than a 16GB chip today. Sony have even ditched optical storage of the PSP for cartridges with the Vita.

Retr0gamer

No. 1 reason why this is nothing but bad news for gamers if it is true:

No competition, therefore MS can charge whatever they like. Just look at the price of Halo Reach on XBLA and how much it goes for brand new on online stores.

jaykhunter

I think Microsoft are just throwing out these rumours/ideas to see how we react to them, whether or not they can implement them. Let's push people to their limit, and then take it back a step...and since it's a rumour they get the response without actually doing it.

I'd be really shocked taking away the option of games via physical discs. I know America has better online service but I imagine being forced to download >8GB of data through your internet every time you want a game is asking alot. Digital-Distribution-Only isn't there yet; i'd think that it's another console iteration away. It solves used game sales but I imagine it ruins eg Christmas sales since it's not a tangible, physical object. Or maybe gamers don't care for physical gifts & unwrapping them, I dunno.

Andy!!

hightower1 wrote: »

Seems a bit silly tbh you doubling you manufacturing costs doing it this way.

I think you are completely misunderstanding the economics of this process. Doubling?? :pac: lol no.

sink

EnterNow wrote: »

Yeah few PS3 games use more than 30GB, but don't forget this is next-gen we're talking about. Proprietary flash memory, & it would be proprietary for security reasons, would be just too expensive for the sized needed.

PS Vita and Nintendo DS/3DS already use proprietary storage formats, and you can pick up new games for as little as €10 for older titles, proving they're not too expensive. And while the interface and format may be proprietary, the microchips that go into them are no different than ones that go into SD cards and SSD's, which fall drastically in price year on year.

Helix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No. 1 reason why this is nothing but bad news for gamers if it is true:

No competition, therefore MS can charge whatever they like. Just look at the price of Halo Reach on XBLA and how much it goes for brand new on online stores.

there is competition though; sony and nintendo

if ms charge ridiculous prices nobody will opt for them

Helix

jaykhunter wrote: »

It solves used game sales but I imagine it ruins eg Christmas sales since it's not a tangible, physical object

it does increase game life longevity though

hightower1

Andy!! wrote: »

I think you are completely misunderstanding the economics of this process. Doubling?? :pac: lol no.

How exactly? The rumor states x2 different consoles that means x2 different cases (as one will have optical drive the other will not) x2 different board sets etc, so yeah....you would be doubling your manufacturing costs as you now need to produce two very different variants of the console.

sink wrote: »

Nintendo moved away from cartridges with the Gamecube in 2001. That's 11 years ago and will be 12 years by the time we get a glimpse of the next gen consoles. In the past 12 years the technology has changed completely. The N64 only had something like a maximum capacity of 16MB, compared to 700mb of a CD. And back then the cost of producing a 16mb chip was a lot dearer than a 16GB chip today. Sony have even ditched optical storage of the PSP for cartridges with the Vita.

The tech has come down in price but is no where near as cost effective as a CD / blu ray to produce. Sony ditched optical storage for the vita as the device was already pushing size limits as is, battery consumption was an issue so solid state was preferred and with the competing devices against the vita are using cloud storage (ipad) and carts (3ds) it made more sense to use those media formats than UMD.

Blowfish

hightower1 wrote: »

The tech has come down in price but is no where near as cost effective as a CD / blu ray to produce.

If you are only looking at the manufacturing costs that may be the case. They are more likely looking at the 'bigger picture' though in that though they'll lose x amount due to the more expensive manufacturing cost per unit, they'll gain y amount through reducing piracy and (if tied to your account) lowering second hand sales. If by their calculations y>x, then they'll go for the proprietary format.

Retr0gamer

Helix wrote: »

there is competition though; sony and nintendo

if ms charge ridiculous prices nobody will opt for them

No, there really isn't, if you buy an MS console you will be stuck with it, most people won't have more than one console. Just look at how bad the prices are for ancient games still on all 3 systems, Nintendo don't even have sales. There'll only be competition if the systems are linked, and there's no chance of that happening. If you are buying on MS's system and tied to an MS console, you've got yourself a monolpoly.

Just compare the consoles to the PC and physical copies markets were there is actual competition.

hightower1

Blowfish wrote: »

If you are only looking at the manufacturing costs that may be the case. They are more likely looking at the 'bigger picture' though in that though they'll lose x amount due to the more expensive manufacturing cost per unit, they'll gain y amount through reducing piracy and (if tied to your account) lowering second hand sales. If by their calculations y>x, then they'll go for the proprietary format.

The site reports that the physical media they refer to being some kind of swappable card system a kin to SD cards I cant see how that would stop trade ins, its just a different physical media but as long as there is a physical media device to trade in then nothing will change in terms of 2nd hand game shops.

Yeah having your content on something like an SD card would reduce piracy but you will still have the card slot on both version of the console so manufacturing costs being higher isnt offset by ether of two reasons. Perhaps they feel if the device is more of a entertainment system and strong enough to warrent sales on that basis alone that why they would release a "light" version of the console at a cheaper price in order to entice those to the brand that normally wouldnt have bought an xbox. If thats the case they feel the extra sales from these customers will justify the manufacturing costs of two console versions but its a mis step. They would have to be targeting someone into home entertainment, in house connectivity and someone pretty into media streaming in house but that customer now is typically male between 18 - 40 years old and they already want or have a console / media center in house. Not a smart move MS. The cards im all for but its going to be costly for them , two versions of the console has no redeeming qualities though.

Helix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No, there really isn't, if you buy an MS console you will be stuck with it

ah here, that's ridiculous talk. nobody is tied for life to a console. you can sell them for starters. and do you honestly think that ms will wait til they've sold a load of consoles before mysteriously ramping up the price to fleece everyone because they'll have no other option? won't happen

people will know prices before the console is available, and they'll be able to make their decision based on that

Kirby

They want each game tied to a machine or an account so it can't be traded in. This is all an attempt to kill the second hand market. They are going about it the wrong way. Aslong as there is a physical media of any kind, be it disc or cartridge or memory card.....it will be traded. Locking games to accounts only works in a purely digital distribution setting.....and we are 10 years or more away from that. It won't work with physical media.

They just need to negotiate a cut of the profits from each second hand game. They get their cake and eat it too.

Helix

Kirby wrote: »

They just need to negotiate a cut of the profits from each second hand game. They get their cake and eat it too.

they tried and failed that a long time ago

Kirby

Helix wrote: »

they tried and failed that a long time ago

They should try again. They are the ones with all the power. If a chain doesn't play ball, refuse to sell to them. Physical stores can't survive without the new stock. They would soon fall in line.

Deano7788

Helix wrote: »

ah here, that's ridiculous talk. nobody is tied for life to a console. you can sell them for starters. and do you honestly think that ms will wait til they've sold a load of consoles before mysteriously ramping up the price to fleece everyone because they'll have no other option? won't happen

people will know prices before the console is available, and they'll be able to make their decision based on that

The only problem is that if MS get to market before Sony, which is practically guaranteed, and are continuing their current pricing strategy, it might be assumed that this is just because it is the next generation of console and that prices always start off higher, which is generally true. Therefore, people will still buy the console.However, if they then fail to drop the digital prices during the life cycle, and if Sony continue to use disc based media, and retailers drop their prices shortly into its life cycle, that's when people who bought the X-box will feel screwed over.

I'm excluding Nintendo from this as I think the Wii-U will be too underpowered to be directly comparable.

Retr0gamer

Helix wrote: »

ah here, that's ridiculous talk. nobody is tied for life to a console. you can sell them for starters. and do you honestly think that ms will wait til they've sold a load of consoles before mysteriously ramping up the price to fleece everyone because they'll have no other option? won't happen

people will know prices before the console is available, and they'll be able to make their decision based on that

It's nothing to do with MS raising prices, it's about how poor value XBLA and PSN are compared to Steam or retail and how they don't even bother to change prices. The sales are crap and you end up with ancient games on the store for stupid prices when you can buy them brand new for less than a tenner. There would be no reason for MS to lower prices since there's no competitor to their prices on their system. Sony will be the same if they drop physical media.

This isn't about killing the second hand market, Sony and MS could not careless about the second hand market. By going totally digital they have created a market that only they control and can then set prices themselves. That's what the big push is towards.

Kirby

Retr0gamer wrote: »

This isn't about killing the second hand market, Sony and MS could not careless about the second hand market. By going totally digital they have created a market that only they control and can then set prices themselves. That's what the big push is towards.

I think you missed the logic train there retro. They care a great deal about the second hand market. They get no profit from it and lose alot of sales because new customers buy used instead.

The reason they are pushing digital is so that that no second hand market will exist. As you say, they control it all. This is soley because of the second hand market. If you can only get your games directly from them, no second hand market exists. They hate it and want it to die.

Retr0gamer

Kirby wrote: »

I think you missed the logic train there retro. They care a great deal about the second hand market. They get no profit from it and lose alot of sales because new customers buy used instead.

The reason they are pushing digital is so that that no second hand market will exist. As you say, they control it all. This is soley because of the second hand market. If you can only get your games directly from them, no second hand market exists. They hate it and want it to die.

Didn't miss any logic train there at all. MS and Sony are the platform producers. Sure they lose a bit to the second hand market but it's more the third party publishers that are losing out to it (which is also debatable, but well they're clinging on to old fashioned pricing structures). MS and Sony are making most of their money on third party licensing no matter how many copies they sell.

I doubt MS and Sony will be going totally digital just for the poor third party publishers sake. More likely they are looking at the Apple store and iTunes to see how they can create a real monopoly without any competitors.

Helix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's nothing to do with MS raising prices, it's about how poor value XBLA and PSN are compared to Steam or retail and how they don't even bother to change prices. The sales are crap and you end up with ancient games on the store for stupid prices when you can buy them brand new for less than a tenner. There would be no reason for MS to lower prices since there's no competitor to their prices on their system. Sony will be the same if they drop physical media.

This isn't about killing the second hand market, Sony and MS could not careless about the second hand market. By going totally digital they have created a market that only they control and can then set prices themselves. That's what the big push is towards.

psn is getting a LOT better over here lately, not sure about there, but the fact that retail vita games are cheaper on psn than they are in the bricks and mortar stores is a move in the right direction and it shows that companies are willing to go that way

Retr0gamer

Helix wrote: »

psn is getting a LOT better over here lately, not sure about there, but the fact that retail vita games are cheaper on psn than they are in the bricks and mortar stores is a move in the right direction and it shows that companies are willing to go that way

Agreed, I also notice them adjusting their pricing as well on older games and have better sales. MS seem to be a lot more stuck in their ways. There's a big move away from XBLA by indie developers going back to PC.

Helix

ms are supposed to be very unhelpful too, which will shoot them in the foot

im very optimistic that sony will have a very, very fair pricing scheme should things go digital only from them. as it stands right now, i can get a $39.99 rrp game (which costs $45.20 after tax) for $34.99 on psn. for me, that's why i genuinely believe that digital distribution will benefit the gamer in the street

richymcdermott

Helix wrote: »

ms are supposed to be very unhelpful too, which will shoot them in the foot

im very optimistic that sony will have a very, very fair pricing scheme should things go digital only from them. as it stands right now, i can get a $39.99 rrp game (which costs $45.20 after tax) for $34.99 on psn. for me, that's why i genuinely believe that digital distribution will benefit the gamer in the street

Well on psn in europe catherine is 60 euros , i dont see how that benefits anybody :pac:

noodler

If ME4 comes out on PS4 and the 720....

It will stay at 50e on the PSN/XBLA forever. There will be no discounts, no Zavvi Mega Mondays.

Obviously, letting retailers sell the codes for the download could possibly help this.

Not looking forward to the day this happens.

Helix

regular discounts on games for ps+ users

danthefan

If it was download only I definitely wouldn't buy it. If there's some other way of getting your games onto the console then meh, I don't see why the media used has to be a disk.

noodler

Helix wrote: »

regular discounts on games for ps+ users

Well, for starters its not a discount if you have to pay to be a member.

Secondly, just because theres the odd decent discount on PSN (even ignoring PS+ for a moment) that doesn't mean it isn't a rip-off 90% of the time.

I am really surprisedby your stance here Helix, what would force a game down from its RRP if games went digital?

Helix

noodler wrote: »

Well, for starters its not a discount if you have to pay to be a member.

the savings in a year from ps+, even if you never bought a discounted ps+ title far outweigh the cost of signing up. even look at it that you're paying 50 quid in advance for about 50 free games a year

noodler wrote: »

Secondly, just because theres the odd decent discount on PSN (even ignoring PS+ for a moment) that doesn't mean it isn't a rip-off 90% of the time.

i cant speak for that side of the pond, but i can assure you over here the cost is very reasonable for the majority of digitally distributed games via psn

noodler wrote: »

I am really surprisedby your stance here Helix, what would force a game down from its RRP if games went digital?

the fact that sony are already showing that they're willing to charge less than retail prices with downloadable vita games?

Retr0gamer

Helix wrote: »

the fact that sony are already showing that they're willing to charge less than retail prices with downloadable vita games?

Well it will be worth seeing if they can match retail prices when the games price starts to bottom out. My guess is they won't.

Helix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Well it will be worth seeing if they can match retail prices when the games price starts to bottom out. My guess is they won't.

no id say you're right there. the thing with digital downloads is that they increase game longevity. there does need to be some kind of system that would be transparent for that kind of thing, say something like this

launch date - price is 100%
3 months after launch - price drops to 90%
6 months after launch - price drops to 70%
9 months after launch - price drops to 50%

that's not really an unrealistic or unfair way to do business. most people aren't going to want to wait that long for AAA titles, but it would mean that smaller games, or ones with less advertising budget could be pushed again after 6 and 9 months to increase overall sales

i think that over the course of a year, if the games were priced in that way, you'd see more games making more money than they would over a 12 month time frame with nothing but 100% pricing