While
Microsoft's multi-SKU method has allowed it to hit the market at a dramatically lower price than the PS3, there are certainly some tradeoffs to that
Xbox 360 Core model. Most notably, the lack of a hard drive means almost zero games have been released that make decent use of the drive in the Premium and Elite models, since Core users would be left out of the fun, no matter how few of them there may be. Luckily, Microsoft is finally lifting that restriction, and will be allowing HDD required games on a case-by-case basis. Developers will be required to estimate the max storage their game will grab, and state plainly on the box the requirement. Of course, Final Fantasy XI has been choking up 360 hard drives for over a year now, but hopefully these new official guidelines will get the creative juices flowing at a few more MMO studios so we can finally end those painful jaunts from the couch to the PC to get in some level grinding.
[Via
Joystiq]
posted August 14th 2007 1:08PM
This will become relevant once I get the confirmation from Engadget stating that my "300 Limited Edition Xbox360" has been shipped. Until then, I'd just read it really fast.
Who said it's your 300 Limited Edition 360? It could be mine.
Anyway, I hate to say this but the harddrive really should have come with all 360s and Sony did make a good decision when including them in all SKUs.
Besides that point, I'm actually glad MS is going with this plan.
AKBlade13
Rate me down if you must, but... I think it's cool to be at an event and reading an Engadget post from it while there :)
BTW, I'm interviewing people while I'm here. If anybody has questions about XNA or others, there are a lot of big name developers/animators here from Bungie, Turn10, and any dev that makes games for Xbox/Windows.
I interviewed Steven Theodore, Lead Animator from Bungie yesterday, and I'm putting the podcast up right now.
If you have any questions for people here, reply to this post and I'll see what I can do :)
Only reaffirms the fact that the Core SKU was born a bastard child.
I never bothered to look into the core model, but can't you just add a hard drive if you needed it? So if Microsoft added like a discount coupon to people buying games that required storage they could purchase the hard drive for cheaper?
Especially with the price drops now, buying the Core is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID.
Analysis:
1) Core ($279) + 512MB Memory Card ($49/required) = $318
2) Core ($279) + 20GB HDD ($99) = $379
3) Premium (w/20GB) = $349
Option #1 is what Microsoft claims gives users a choice, but that's total BS. People will see their mistake and be forced to get option #2 which is MORE expensive than option #3 (and lets hope they didn't buy the memory card before that or that's even more money).
You see, "choice" is a common con game manufacturers play to get you to buy more expensive products, and I accept that. But when they try to pull this shit on customers who aren't as aware, that's when I am sorely disappointed. =/
If a consumer is unaware, than it is his fault he has to pay more.
The Core was born because Microsoft was too concerned about being able to match prices with a possible HDD-less PS3. It was an unfortunate return of Microsoft's 'follower' mentality that was surprisingly absent in the first box.
Now, SSDs are viable and their costs drop like any other component in the case, so including storage isn't a problem. They need to just pack a 4 or 8GB SSD into the Core and be done with it.
But odds are they'll just kill the Core now, because they're stupid.
Dropping a small hard drive in the core would still be infinitely cheaper than an SSD drive. SSD's are still significantly more expensive that HDD per GB, regardless of the total drive size.
Mangetic drives are far cheaper per GB, but the point was that you don't need much, and unlike HDDs, SSD prices drop along the lines of every other electronic component.
HDD's have a lower limit on cost that's around 40 bucks. As time progresses you get more and more space for that 40 bucks, but they just don't get much cheaper. That's why Microsoft was gun-shy on HDDs. They lost their ass eating $40 a unit on the XBOX trying to match prices with the PS2 and they didn't want to do it again. (not knowing Sony would go with HDDs in every unit)
But a 4GB flash drive today costs less than 40 bucks - and that price is going to continue dropping. My point was that Microsoft could bundle a small SSD in the Core to enable caching for gamers and devs without running afoul of the economics of magnetic disks. It'd be more expensive per GB than a magnetic disk - but who cares? the unit cost is lower and will continue to get lower.
Did you ever think of this one?
Buying the 360 is "STUPID, STUPID, STUPID" because:
Buying ps3 (which has 60gb HDD, blu ray, wireless) = $499
Buying 360 premium ($350) + HD DVD Drive ($180) + wireless ($90) + Xbox Live ($50/y)= $670, and that has 40GB less space than the ps3, yet still $170 more.
Microsoft has made the 360 into basically a money trap. You can't truly enjoy your games without the wireless and Xbox Live, which alone makes the 360 more than the ps3 and far more expensive than it should be. The ps3 also comes with Blu-Ray which makes it of better value, being that the blu-ray holds 50GB+ (they have some with 500) and that DVD-9 only holds around 14GB. HD-DVD is still not as good as blu-ray, and while this little add-on may be better than buying a stand-alone HD DVD player, it is still far overpriced compared to the bargain deal that the PS3 is. I absolutely hate it when people talk about how the PS3 is sooooo overpriced and the 360 is way cheaper and more cost-efficient for people with lower budgets. It's really the 360 that is overpriced and less cost-efficient, and not to mention, more prone to breaking. If you read between the lines, it is all clear.
It never actually occurred to me that a game system would be a stupid buy because of the cost of optional add-ons.
I don't give a crap about next-gen disc formats in my game console.
I don't give a crap about HDD space on my game console.
I don't give a crap about first-party wireless adapters (I have a WDS router feeding my entertainment center for my tivo, emulator box, 360, wii and ps2 - i literally unplugged the xbox and plugged in the 360 for $0)
And I don't really give a crap about paying $4 a month for an actually -useful- internet gaming service. Live was worth $50 when the alternative was free PC multiplayer or free ps2 multi, and it's still worth it now that free ps3 multi is an option. global friends lists, messaging, out-of-game invites, no HPBs, etc - are all worth $50.
I care about playing the games I like.
Since those games aren't JRPGs, there's really not enough reason for me to buy a ps3, let alone pay $100 more than it cost to get a 360 to play the games i like.
It really is that simple.
Rather off topic, but am I the only one who thinks the font in that picture is wonderful?
Any ideas on what it is?
Trebuchet MS
I reject the notion that having a HDD-less Xbox 360 sku hurts the gamer. The only advantage for the gamer is caching data. And I think everyone knows that caching can easily be an optional feature. Developers are just mad about it because it's easier for them to just dump stuff on the drive. But for caching purposes there's no reason why that can't be optional.
My understanding is that it also limits level design to whatever can fit on a single dvd, unless they bring back the notion of swapping out for discs two and three, like the good old days of FF7.
But if they were allowed to use some of the hard drive, they could include a "supplemental data disc" and have that data be stored on the hdd, preventing the need to swap discs out while you're playing.
Also optional... And anyways, if we're 2 years into the 360's lifespan and there's only been one or two games tops thats needed more than 1 disc, I think it's clear DVD has been holding up just fine.
I hate to say this, since usually I am not one to promote Sony hardware ... but:
The PS3 doesn't have these size limiting, disc swapping factors. Its games are stored on discs that support up to 50GB.
This could be a good thing, how much easier will it be to edit game files.
Yeah, DVD-9 has proven that it's more than enough storage space for the games being made today. Honestly, there is only one example of an Xbox 360 game that absolutely needed the harddrive caching, and that is Oblivion (ran pretty crappy if you didn't do the HDD caching). So while Sony fanboys can laugh all day, they should be reminded that the additional read speeds that DVD-9 has over Blu-Ray, allow for caching not to be needed on 99% of the games made for the Xbox 360. On the other hand, the slow speed of Blu-Ray requires that alot of games need the caching >< which is particularly annoying, because my PS3's HDD is filling up, and fast.
Ya, that ~2mb/sec faster read on 15% of the DVD-9 surely trounces the constant read speed of Blu-ray.
It's great that DVD-9 is good enough for the games of today. But today is almost over.
Game development is like gas and will expand to fill it's containter. That being said, you don't hear developers complaining about it because it's not like MS can do much besides kill off the Core SKU and make 360 HDDs cheaper. Unfortunately, that's not gonna happen for a long time, so everyone looses.
Is it just for me to point out this is only for MMOs? What of the other types?
Your a fool, if you think DVD9 will suitable for the next 5 years.
Developers are struggling today with the 360's crippling limitations, like lack of HDD and BD storage.
Microsoft have today shown, they have no quarms about moving the goalposts, and suddenly requiing HDD's, the won't be losing sleep on doing the same requirement for HD DVD next year.
The multiple SKU thing is actually a pretty good idea--in concept, anyhow. For example, I'm not interested in HD movies, so I have no need for an HD-DVD or Bluray drive. My brother doesn't have a HDTV, so he has no need for component cables--the composite cables bundled with the core are sufficient for him. Multiple SKUs allow the hardware manufacturer to sell high quality systems with a low entry point.
MS's only mistake is that the core SKU doesn't retain the basic gaming functionality the premium/elite SKUs have. You can't play games anymore without a means of saving your game. Welcome to 10 years ago! Even if the core systems came with a built in 512 MB hard drive, that'd be enough. But the way it is now, they aren't giving gamers 'choice,' they're just taking advantage of buyers who aren't savvy to the differences in the SKUs.
As far as DVD9 vs Bluray goes, game developers will always use as much storage space as they can get their grubby lil mitts on. Doesn't mean they need that much space. Look at Res Evil 4. It only uses 2 gamecube disks, which is roughly 3 gigs. Not that RE4 is on the same level as next gen games, but if Capcom could fit RE4 on the cube, then devs can fit great stuff on DVD 9 for the next 5-7 years.