Jump to content

Xbox Series X | S


djbhammer
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Super Craig said:

A quick look on Scan suggests that it's nearly twice the price for an SSHD. Even as an optional premium feature, it sounds like a waste of money. Capacity is where the focus should be. 1TB might not even be enough as a base option by the time next gen arrives.

 

2TB Firecuda’s about £80 on Amazon, regular Barracuda at the same size is £65-ish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Super Craig said:

A quick look on Scan suggests that it's nearly twice the price for an SSHD. Even as an optional premium feature, it sounds like a waste of money. Capacity is where the focus should be. 1TB might not even be enough as a base option by the time next gen arrives.

nope, remember, you need to look at 2.5inch drives, not 3.5, although the 3.5 ARE cheaper ...alot, but those wont be going in consoles.

the difference is £16 and bear in mind, these are the prices we would pay, not a manufacturer

 

2tb hd  - £68

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/2tb-seagate-guardian-barracuda-hdd-25-sata-iii-6gb-s-7mm-form-factor-128mb-cache-5900rpm

2tb sshd £84

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/2tb-seagate-st2000lx001-25-firecuda-sshd-8gb-cmlc-nand-sata-iii-6gb-s-5400rpm-128mb-cache-7-mm-heigh

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its a bit odd that there is no difference in price between the 2.5 and 3.5 2tb sshd's?! wouldn't have thought that!

 

but to get back to the topic, i think people have pointed out possibly the best compromise, of using a small ssd/nvme/nand for OS and as a part hybrid, with a standard storage for the rest!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/06/2018 at 21:44, Alex W. said:

The price difference between an HDD and an SSHD is so small I’ll probably always get them from now on.

 

You say that, but did they put one into their premium most powerful console on the planet... ? Wider SSHD adoption doesn't seem that great still, probably for cost reasons (or they aren't enough of an improvement compared to just putting in an actual SSD).

 

 

On 01/07/2018 at 08:56, rafaqat said:

You could probably achieve quick loading times by simply mandating it in your acceptance criteria.  It's surprising what Devs can achieve with suitable incentives..

 

This is like expecting Microsoft to actually enforce their minimum resolution requirement like they did on the X360 ;) Especially when they were granting exceptions to themselves way before they decided to remove those TRCs officially, even from the launch of the console.

 

Longer loading times are really just a symptom of massively larger data requirements for modern games, even so called cartridge based games have noticeable loading times these days, so much for the solid state myth.

 


 

Quote

 

In a column published today on Develop, Black Rock Studio (Pure, Split/Second) technical director David Jeffrries revealed that Microsoft has removed an item from its TCRs (Technical Certification Requirements) that stated all Xbox 360 games must run at a minimum of 1280x720 (720p) resolution if the system is in HD mode. According to Jeffries, this was done earlier this year so that developers could be "free to make the trade-off between resolution and image quality as we see fit."

TCRs are technical "rules" that all games developed for a given platform must adhere to in order to be certified for release. Of course, some games that have skirted this specific TCR have still been allowed on the system; the most notable being Microsoft's own Halo 3, which runs at 1152x640 (progressive).

Joystiq has confirmed with a trusted source familiar with Microsoft's TCRs that Jeffries' claim is legit. Not only that, but, as of March 2009, Xbox 360 developers are no longer required to utilize full-screen anti-aliasing in their games. The elimination of both requirements is especially noteworthy since the console maker had touted that all 360 games would run at a minimum of 720p with at least 2x FSAA since before the hardware launched.


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that TRC was dropped because it was untenable, much like a proposed TRC to limit loading times is equally untenable long term. Some developer would bring out some amazing game that would push past the requirement and Microsoft would just give them a pass, just like they did for themselves with multiple First-party games being allowed to ignore the minimum resolution requirement before they dropped it officially. TRCs which limit developer choice during development or cause a lot of pain all seem to eventually fall over the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Quote

Back at E3, Microsoft mentioned that they were working on a next-generation console. At that time, I noted that this new console is a family of devices and was going by the name of Scarlett.

 

Since uncovering that little bit of info, I was able to dig up a few tiny bits of content about how Microsoft is developing its next-generation consoles. And yes consoles because right now, they are planning two different pieces of hardware.

 

First, Microsoft is building a traditional console that you would expect from the Xbox brand. I think it’s important to point this out so that those who prefer to have all their hardware locally, will have an option with the next generation Xbox.

 

As for specs for this device, that’s still not known at this time as it’s the early days of development for that piece of hardware. But what I am starting to hear more about is the second device, a streaming box that is designed to work with the company’s upcoming game streaming platform.

 

Scarlett Cloud as one person called it, is the game streaming service that we have all been envisioning ever since Microsoft showed off a demo game streaming at its all-employee meeting back in 2013. But this time, Microsoft has a path to bring it to market.

 

The second ‘console’ that the company is working on is a lower-powered device that is currently planned to ship with the next generation device that is designed for game-streaming. But the catch here is that Microsoft thinks it has figured out how to handle the latency sensitive aspects of gaming.

 

The cloud console will have a limited amount of compute locally for specific tasks like controller input, image processing, and importantly, collision detection. The downside of this is that it since more hardware is needed locally, it will raise the price of the streaming box but it will still cost significantly less than what we are accustomed to paying for a new-generation console which should help expand the platform’s reach.

 

And that is very important as Microsoft doesn’t typically make much money on the hardware sales but they do on things like Xbox Live, Xbox Gamepass, and game sales. If Microsoft can create a next-gen console that requires lower up-front payment and longer subscription payments (remember, all games will run in the cloud, so you will need to pay ‘something’ to access them), this is a huge win for Xbox and Microsoft.

 

The portion of the game that runs locally, some have referred to it as a slice or splice, means that the game is ‘running’ in two locations at the same time and utilizes Microsoft’s cloud to stitch it all together.

 

The benefit here is that Microsoft’s cloud platform reaches around the globe with data centers in every major market. This makes streaming the games platform available globally but this also likely means that it can run on any type of device. Of course, Microsoft would love you to buy their hardware but the company’s end-goal is that you can access ‘Xbox’ from any device, anywhere and Scarlett Cloud is looking to deliver on this idea.

 

One person familiar with Microsoft’s plans said that this may reduce latency in all aspects of the game as well. If a multiplayer game is using Azure as it’s central server, Scarlett Cloud console will be closer physically to the multiplayer server resulting in less latency.

 

When it comes to games, all Scarlett games will run on all Scarlett devices. Meaning, both consoles will be first-class citizens and there is not expected to be an awkward ‘this game only runs on the non-cloud Scarlett’.

 

The cloud version of Scarlett is further along in the development cycle than the traditional console that will also be released in 2020. This device does make me wonder if it has any relationship to the Xbox Hobart streaming device that was nearly released two years ago but was canceled late in the development cycle.

 

Microsoft has become quite confident in their streaming solution and now that they figured out how to bring it to market after many years of development, they are pushing forward with those plans.

 

https://www.thurrott.com/xbox/163896/details-microsofts-xbox-scarlett-game-streaming-service

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Kirby said:

The tech looks clever, and they could potentially capture both the budget and enthusiast market if there are two consoles. Unsure of the demand for streaming services though, I didn't have the impression PS Now was a runaway success.

 

That was down to having a really shitty pricing model. 

Streaming itself actually worked fine for my needs. Also Sony wouldn't put all their games on the service. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, yashiro said:

Seems risky. Could be the next Kinect.

Which one?

 

The  extremely sucessful one that sold 24 million, or the NSA spy camera that sat there listening to your every word, ready to sell your data to a multi-billion dollar corporation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, yashiro said:

Seems risky. Could be the next Kinect.

 

They're supposedly taking both approaches. local play normal console on one hand, streaming box++ on the other. It would be risky if they went with just one approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just seems to be the way we're heading. Google are also rumoured to be working on game streaming hardware. Admittedly, whatever Google are working on isn't a reliable indicator, but still.

 

Is PS Now making money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, EvilBoris said:

The  extremely sucessful one that sold 24 million, or the NSA spy camera that sat there listening to your every word, ready to sell your data to a multi-billion dollar corporation? 

 

That's the risk, right? On the one hand it might take off! On the other, people may resent the perceived anti-consumer move to renting games in perpetuity.

 

The dedicated streaming box is a gamble. All other boxes and services like this have failed. So they're also launching a proper console in tandem. This time.

 

Going by the MS research clip the streambox will probably need a low power x86 apu similar to the architecture of the real deal Xbox. Development would be a pain otherwise.

 

It's starting to look like it's not going to be that cheap? Maybe something like $199?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, yashiro said:

 

That's the risk, right? On the one hand it might take off! On the other, people may resent the perceived anti-consumer move to renting games in perpetuity.

 

The dedicated streaming box is a gamble. All other boxes and services like this have failed. So they're also launching a proper console in tandem. This time.

 

Going by the MS research clip the streambox will probably need a low power x86 apu similar to the architecture of the real deal Xbox. Development would be a pain otherwise.

 

It's starting to look like it's not going to be that cheap? Maybe something like $199?

 

 

 

Have you tried gamespass?

or played “free” games on PS+?

or EA Access’s anti consumer proposition?

 

those are rent in perpetuity, compensating by allowing you to rent hundreds of games at once. If you think it’s an anti consumer move, compared to paying £50-£100 for a normal/special edition that drops in price by the cost of two months or more subscription payments in a month, then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I see a real difference in this supposed streaming console and effectively any multiplayer game we already have, except also the graphics are being centrally generated. It seems something of an uncritical press release readout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Streaming sounds shite to be honest but it'll be good for the people who live in areas with amazing broadband I guess.

 

Of course the more they push for a platform agnostic model, eventually they'll end up paving the way for non gaming companies to come in and eat their lunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

I'm not sure I see a real difference in this supposed streaming console and effectively any multiplayer game we already have, except also the graphics are being centrally generated. It seems something of an uncritical press release readout.

 

There is no need to have a powerful console to play the same games, that's the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Mighty Ash said:

There is no need to have a powerful console to play the same games, that's the difference.

 

Sure, so a slightly cheaper console in the home.

 

But it's not some new revolution, as far as I can see, is what I'm saying. We already have streamed games. They're OK already. Doing a pass of anti-aliasing and running maybe some internal wireframe version of the game might be better, I guess? But if the logic is being run in the cloud (and all these streaming solutions already typically run pretty close to the end user) then you're still open to the cloud game thinking the enemies are in one place whilst you're seeing them in another. It's basically opening up every game to the sort of lag you see in a PVP game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SMD said:

Streaming sounds shite to be honest but it'll be good for the people who live in areas with amazing broadband I guess.

 

I have amazing broadband but every time I've given streaming a go, I was able to see the video artifacting. And it's shit. Most people probably don't notice, persumably the same people who don't notice when the image tears itself to hell and framerate drops like a stone. So for most people it will probably be fine, but I worry that I will never get on with streaming even if they manage to eliminate input lag completely (which so far nobody has). What happens when streaming becomes the only available option to play the new games? I'll probably be the grumpy grandpa sitting in his mancave with his retro consoles grumbling about how we used to have sharp, clear images and responsive controls 'when I was young' - and the young kids will think it's funny because artifacting is 'more cinematic' and grandpa is way behind the times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Gerbik said:

I have amazing broadband but every time I've given streaming a go, I was able to see the video artifacting. And it's shit. Most people probably don't notice, persumably the same people who don't notice when the image tears itself to hell and framerate drops like a stone. So for most people it will probably be fine, but I worry that I will never get on with streaming even if they manage to eliminate input lag completely (which so far nobody has). What happens when streaming becomes the only available option to play the new games? I'll probably be the grumpy grandpa sitting in his mancave with his retro consoles grumbling about how we used to have sharp, clear images and responsive controls 'when I was young' - and the young kids will think it's funny because artifacting is 'more cinematic' and grandpa is way behind the times.

 

I'd probably tap out if we only had streaming as an option, might still dabble casually but the only upside is the subscription model. I'd love to see how much more energy and the difference in carbon footprint running all those data centres involve vs local machines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.