• Xbox 360 has 'a lot more than two years' left, MS boss says
    267 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Hellborg 65;36260105]I think the thing most of you seem to be missing is that gameplay is more important than graphics. The 360 has 2 years left, because the folks at Microsoft has probably calculated that it will be able to cope with the average increase in gfx technology to a certain extent which still allows it to deliver a stable form of gameplay. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] Consoles are good because you don't need to buy new shit for them every two years. In most cases, it will last without a replacement longer than a PC lasts without needing a new graphics card. Microsoft obviously want to increase its longevity a bit more to further increase the satisfaction of those who don't want to deal with PC gaming.[/QUOTE] No, the folks at Microsoft calculated that they can still make a profit on the 360 for the next 2 years because they control 50% of the console market. It has nothing to do with increasing "the satisfaction of those who don't want to deal with PC gaming." Even most non-gamers I know are commenting on how long it's been since a new console has come out.
[QUOTE=junker|154;36260531]Red Orchestra for instance isn't, Stalker neither, Empire Total War was also horrible in terms of performance. Bad Company was a somewhat bad port, it just runs well on quad cores. You cannot generalize that, there are to many games that are not ports.[/QUOTE] Not saying all of them are, but many games comes on PC unoptimized and with awful controls because they are lazy ports.
[QUOTE=junker|154;36260248]Yeah, but people have generally not the knowledge/money to get gaming rigs that can run such huge games.[/QUOTE] [img_thumb]http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af150/The_FalconO6/CurrentLogicalPCBuyingGuide/Guide.png[/img_thumb] All the knowledge you need when building a gaming PC. Click to enlarge.
[QUOTE=junker|154;36260531]Red Orchestra for instance isn't, Stalker neither, Empire Total War was also horrible in terms of performance. Bad Company was a somewhat bad port, it just runs well on quad cores. You cannot generalize that, there are to many games that are not ports. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] I have two pcs right now. Although that one is a laptop, but still marked as a gaming laptop. It was a gift to me. Still with such a rig I could play most things but I cannot. Something like that, it is already a bit older but still it should play some newer games. But it dies at newer games.[/QUOTE] Both of those setups are very poor, especially the second one. That was outdated 3 years ago.
Am I the only one here that didn't believe the "Xbox 720" hype one bit?
[QUOTE=sp00ks;36260834]Both of those setups are very poor, especially the second one. That was outdated 3 years ago.[/QUOTE] I agree, but it did cost a lot of money and maintaince. But seriously, the first pc seems like a decent rig. What standards do you have? You are at least some spoiled child with a topnotch rig. I am a student and cannot simply afford such a thing. Therefore I tend to consoles, bought it once and things are somewhat fine without worrying.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;36260834]Both of those setups are very poor, especially the second one. That was outdated 3 years ago.[/QUOTE] Wait what? A rig with: Windows 7 64-BitIntel Core i7-2Ghz Nvidia Geforce 540 with 1760 Mb Ram 6GB DDR3 Memory is not poor. That's midrange at worst, mid-high at best. Hell, I'm on: AMD Phenom II x4 965 3.4ghz GeForce 460GTX 1gb 4GB DDR3 RAM That rig runs everything I throw at it at max, save perhaps for HBAO or Ubersampling. You've got some interesting standards.
Thanks Jean for backing me up. Honestly that rig could play games without problems, still I have some problems. Although it is a laptop, they generally suck more. Also Red Orchestra, Empire Total War and Stalker are not ports.
Didn't say they were ?
As Microsoft have already stated, the Xbox 360 is more and more becoming a 'media centre'. I think that once the Xbox 720 is out, the 360 will serve more of a media purpose than a gaming purpose. I really dig Metro with apps like YouTube, 4OD, BBC iPlayer and Vevo, it looks sexy and it's also intuitive. The Xbox 360 still has a long life-span, just not in the world of gaming.
[QUOTE=BBgamer720;36261222]As Microsoft have already stated, the Xbox 360 is more and more becoming a 'media centre'. I think that once the Xbox 720 is out, the 360 will serve more of a media purpose than a gaming purpose. I really dig Metro with apps like YouTube, 4OD, BBC iPlayer and Vevo, it looks sexy and it's also intuitive. The Xbox 360 still has a long life-span, just not in the world of gaming.[/QUOTE] Too bad the older ones are louder than a jet engine and pretty power consuming for an HTPC.
[QUOTE=junker|154;36261047]I agree, but it did cost a lot of money and maintaince. But seriously, the first pc seems like a decent rig. What standards do you have? You are at least some spoiled child with a topnotch rig. I am a student and cannot simply afford such a thing. Therefore I tend to consoles, bought it once and things are somewhat fine without worrying.[/QUOTE] What really gets me is why you're being passive-aggressive and attacking him for simply saying your rig was poor. You realize adults can have jobs and save up money for computers right? Not everyone is some spoiled child as you like to believe. Mine can play games like BF3 on high at 40-60FPS and it only cost my family around 800USD. Really more like 700USDish if you don't count in the OS' cost. I come from an okay family, not really spoiled or rich. Every computer I have lasts 3-4 years until they break. I only got this rig out of a stroke of luck, (Tax Returns and such). Before that I was trying to play modern games on a single core 2004ish office computer (than eventually got a dual core for it). Consoles are a nice investment and that's true, 300USD to play every game, but than you lose a lot of additional stuff such as better graphics or mod support. But at the same time, you can simply run games on lower settings. So to assume you need an 800-1000USD Rig is a total fallacy, as you can just lower the settings to something similar to the 360 or even less. I don't understand how you can not run games like Bad Company 2 or anything of that sort. My old PC with a simple Dual Core (Athlon 64) and 8600GTS could run those games, maybe on low-medium at 30-40. But I could play and enjoy them. Games like Stalker I would have to turn off graphical effects, but they were still enjoyable and very playable. Hell I don't even know how you can barely run Red Orchestra, it ran fine on this old rig too.
[QUOTE=junker|154;36260531]Something like that, it is already a bit older but still it should play some newer games. But it dies at newer games.[/QUOTE] So that is one of the first dual core CPU's I assume? The 8800GTX was powerful for a good while, it came out in 2007 so 5 years is a bit too much to expect from it to last. It kinda saw it's days go by in 2010 and last year was kinda it. But it should still work on most games as you say. Also your laptop is a bit hard to judge. The CPU is good, absolutely. But the graphic card is a 540 which isn't all that high. But it should really play any new games without much of a hassle as long as the graphical demand isn't too high on your part. So it's a bit weird that you say that you can't. Be sure to have the latest drivers and yadda yadda. [QUOTE=junker|154;36261047]I agree, but it did cost a lot of money and maintaince. But seriously, the first pc seems like a decent rig. What standards do you have? You are at least some spoiled child with a topnotch rig. I am a student and cannot simply afford such a thing. Therefore I tend to consoles, bought it once and things are somewhat fine without worrying.[/QUOTE] I am a student at age 20. I have a Geforce 560 TI, a intel 7-930 2.8GHz and 12GB DDR3 RAM, a 120GB SSD and 5TB of HDD's and a extra 1TB External HDD bought with my own hard earned money. Not drinking, not smoking, hardly rely on the mobile phone, not having a TV and not having a car helps a lot.
[QUOTE=Warship;36261271]Too bad the older ones are louder than a jet engine and pretty power consuming for an HTPC.[/QUOTE] True. I'm pretty sure the Raspberry Pi mini-chipboard computers can decode HD video pretty easily. Someone created a optimized XBMC version for it as far as I know, cheaper and probably a better option!
[QUOTE=junker|154;36261047]I agree, but it did cost a lot of money and maintaince. But seriously, the first pc seems like a decent rig. What standards do you have? You are at least some spoiled child with a topnotch rig. I am a student and cannot simply afford such a thing. Therefore I tend to consoles, bought it once and things are somewhat fine without worrying.[/QUOTE] I too am a student, but I work very much.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36256658]who cares? if they can make interesting games, why not continue with the current user-base they've already established?[/QUOTE] Because the limitations include shit like low resolution or 60 fps. Battlefield 3 for one is a victim of outdated consoles. 24 players max instead of 64. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] A shitload of games suffer for it.
[QUOTE=Lizzrd;36262057]Because the limitations include shit like low resolution or 60 fps. Battlefield 3 for one is a victim of outdated consoles. 24 players max instead of 64. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] A shitload of games suffer for it.[/QUOTE] I think we are also starting to see [i]some[/i] developers forgo trying to cater to the consoles first so they can truly go all out.
xbox 360 graphics card is basically a gtx 7800 [img]http://img.tomshardware.com/us/2005/12/02/vga_charts_viii/gf_7800gtx.jpg[/img]
the 360 could hardly run fable 2 when that came out. constantly sounded like it was chewing up fucking gravel whenever i played that game.
The horrible thing is that many developers develop their games for consoles and 'port' them to the PC platform so even if the PC platform has superior hardware, the consoles will affect it.
I normally wouldn't care about consoles anyway, the problem is, and everyone knows it too, that game sales on consoles are much higher than pc and hence games are made for them and pc gets to eat the same bread for dinner.
People who have been holding off buying a 360 expecting one next year will break down and buy it. MS releases Nextbox next year and make even more money.
[QUOTE=mysteryman;36256864]devs are now forced to render mostly on the cpu instead of the gpu. You shouldn't be using a cpu as a gpu.[/QUOTE] Uhhhh, a CPU is really terrible for vector calculations, that's exactly the reason why we have dedicated GPU's, you know, to do the job properly. A CPU has no programmable shader pipeline, that would have to be handled in software. It has no dedicated video decoders, do you really want to handle that in software mode? The only kind of rendering I can think of which is handled on a CPU is ray tracing which is incredibly expensive.
This thread has massively derailed. :v:
Of course I find this story, just after telling my freind to not buy a new xbox 360 because I thought the new xbox 720 was going to be released next year!
Xbox 360 - Turn 360 degrees and walk away.
[QUOTE=Warship;36260267]Well obviously the textures are low resolution compared to today's standards, but the game itself will still actually run in 1920x1080, and it will also render the game that way. The xbox only has a very few amount of games that actually render in 1080p. Others are just upscaled from smaller resolutions.[/QUOTE] I never said that the games wouldn't run. What i said is that older games when forced to play on 1080 will suffer from scaled textures. It seems that most of the people here just "gloss" over the posts i make. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=inconspicious;36264994]Uhhhh, a CPU is really terrible for vector calculations, that's exactly the reason why we have dedicated GPU's, you know, to do the job properly. A CPU has no programmable shader pipeline, that would have to be handled in software. It has no dedicated video decoders, do you really want to handle that in software mode? The only kind of rendering I can think of which is handled on a CPU is ray tracing which is incredibly expensive.[/QUOTE] Once again, i'm not saying that the devs are not using the gpu. What i'm saying is that most devs, in an effort to stay up to par with new games are relying more heavily on the cpu.
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;36259768]ITT: Legitimate Xbox hate and PC gaming Nazi's.[/QUOTE] ITT appreciation of the superior platform, mocking of the inferior platform if you're looking at it from the fanboy perspective you're looking at it in the wrong way xbox 360 is literally a lesser platform, and the fact that there's this thing called [B]competition[/B] between products makes microsoft stupid for not wanting to change their outdated, and obviously inferior, system [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=sheridanm;36266028]Xbox 360 - Turn 360 degrees and walk away.[/QUOTE] watch the people who don't understand satire rate this post dumb
[QUOTE=thisispain;36260449]exactly what job is the CPU doing that the GPU is supposed to do?[/QUOTE] numerous ps3 devs have been offloading post-processing effects to the spes
[QUOTE=mysteryman;36266137]Once again, i'm not saying that the devs are not using the gpu. What i'm saying is that most devs, in an effort to stay up to par with new games are relying more heavily on the cpu.[/QUOTE] How exactly? Besides the xbox's CPU is a pile of crap.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.