That is, the X-Box 2. Info supposedly based on alpha/dev hardware.
http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/microsoft-x...331p1.html
Three 4ghz powerpc cpus, ati video card (next generation above the X800), 256mb ram, standard dvd media, no dedicated sound card, hard drive optional (size undetermined), camera included. Oh, and there are memory cards too of course.
Also, it says that MS says all games must be Live-enabled, developed for high definition, and can use custom soundtracks...
Hmm... X-Box backwards compatibility isn't looking good...
It's going to struggle a lot, I think, if it doesn't have backwards compatiblity and the PS3 does.
Quote:Three 4ghz powerpc cpus
Is that really a good idea?
er, it's three 3ghz PowerPC CPUs. :)
And yes, no backwards compatibility is a big problem given that Sony is sure to include it... it'll apply to Nintendo too if Revolution isn't GC compatible. But MS would have major problems doing that given how different the X-Box's hardware is from the X-Box 2... which is obviously why we keep hearing that there won't be any.
Really, if it's not X-Box compatible, the final name really shouldn't be X-Box Anything...
Wowsers, how many fans is this thing going to have?
Anyone else the the optional HDD is stupid?
some people just dont use it that much and without it, the cost goes way down. It would mean the difference between a $300 system at launch or a $200 system.
But any optional thing sells worse, reducing the number of titles that can support it... even at the best of times for expansions (like, probably, the N64 expansion pack) it can be a struggle... and the HDD was one of the big advantages of the X-Box. Making it optional is defihitely a step backwards.
Yes. Just like the optional PS2 HDD which barely got any support, or any expensive add-on situation (which this would pretty much be).
Even the PS2 network adapter didn't get very much support, despite the popularity of Socom.
I'd say that the PS2 has gotten a pretty solid online lineup... certainly no comparison to the X-Box, but not awful. There are a good number of games that have online on both PS2 and X-Box, after all.
Compared to the X-Box it's pitiful though.
Well actually the hard drive is used by EVERY game on the XBox, and thus by EVERY player, but only for save files for the most part. Very few really use it to it's fullest potential, the potential that Nintendo has seen in hard drive add-ons all these years.
Not including it with the system is a bad idea though. And, splitting the market by having one version with the hard drive included and one without wouldn't do either. The best bet is to simply include a cheap hard drive with the system, like the 8 gig one they already have built into the current XBox, and just sell the higher capacity ones seperatly. That way, they cut down on cost and can still make sure EVERYONE has a hard drive, so that no one has to buy an addon. The only issue will be when someone fills up their hard drive and has to buy a new one, but no SINGLE game will be out of anyone's reach this way (just make sure all games designed to really put the writable space to work stay below the 8 gig limit).
According to IGN, it only has backwards compatibility mode when a hard drive is in the system. It's rather obvious why, but it's still a bad thing that pretty much says the system doesn't have backwards compatibility, out of the box. Again, just include a smaller hard drive, XBox sized, in the system at launch, which can later be upgraded should the need arise.
Also, IGN SAYS it has 3 controller slots (two in front and a USB slot in back). However, a USB slot is not a 3rd controller slot. The PS2 has two USB slots and not a single game in the entire PS2 library supports using USB controllers in those slots. No one can rightly say the PS2 has 4 controller slots. So, this system has 2 controller slots from what I can tell based on IGN's specs. That means, a multitap will be needed for any 4 player action, and that also means the backwards compatibility function will need to be tooled to support a multitap mode of operation and a non-multitap mode of operation. Just some code based on what it detects on startup, but it's still an annoyance. Where exactly is the microphone supposed to be plugged in anyway? Even if they have ONE port, if 4 players with 4 XBox Live accounts play, how can all 4 use the headsets they really CAN use? (I've tested that, all XBox Live games let you do it.) Honestly, MS is actually taking a few steps BACK with the controller design here. This is akin to when Sega actually took two buttons OFF the Saturn controller to make the Dreamcast controller, it's a mistake, and one developers will notice. Again, I must say that the right move to take isn't going BACK like this, but moving FORWARD, in the sense that instead of using 4 exclusive controller ports, use 4 USB ports. By using 4 USB ports as the default controller ports, you can use the controller included with the system, and also you have, right at launch, the system's keyboard, mouse, headsets, and whatever else that person already has on their home computer, without needing to design or liscense it out at all. The only thing they need do is program in the support for those devices. The controllers on the system should, rather than the controller ports it has, have a couple USB ports as well. Then, boom, you again have a headset port right up at your face, only now you don't need the silly XBox adapter to use it, you just need a USB headset. The other one can be used as the next system's memory card slot, really really small memory cards that can actually fit in the cases with the games.
All in all, I really don't care that much about the hardware improvements in this new generation. Yeah yeah I know, it'll allow photorealism... whatever... I want an evolution of the actual interaction element.