Xbox 2 Sneak Peek May Not Involve Hardware?

Thanks to GamesIndustry.biz for its article discussing the possible unveiling of the Xbox 2 at Game Developer's Conference in San Jose later this month. According to the piece, a Microsoft Japan staffer suggested that "the console's actual hardware will probably not be unveiled at GDC, and that a decision had not yet been taken to as to when the technical specifications of the system should be released." Although some basic technical details have allegedly been leaked, the piece argues: "Some commentators have suggested that Microsoft is holding back from a final decision on the RAM, and possibly on the inclusion of a hard drive, until it finds out what Sony is planning to do with the PS3."

Comments

Technology U-Turn from X-Box

[chilled]

I think it's quite funny that the X-Box was sold to developers as effectively a standard PC, enabling quicker and easier development, yet they're going for a new architecture. You could interpret it as a admission that M$ got the X-Box wrong.
And unveiling something that doesn't exist seems a bit strange too. Here's hoping they fail spectacularly.

Re:Technology U-Turn from X-Box

[*weasel]

Microsoft got developers on board because doing an XBox port was easy, and their tools are top-shelf (particularly given the PS2s SDK clusterfark). Microsoft already has had PPC compilers in their existing tools (for decades now) - so none of that changes in the least.

The only thing about the neXtBox that might be different is the omission of the harddrive. Yet, if you consider the current crop of games, most developers are only using it to store save games and downloadable content. Things a large chunk of flash memory (their proposed alternative) can do easily.

So where's the big change? The ability to use the HD for swap space is gone (largely unused anway) and custom soundtracks are uncertain. That's it.

What they got wrong in the XBox is including a part that doesn't fall in price with economies of scale. Harddrives get bigger - not cheaper. A move to flash memory will give them most of the functionality while still having a part that follows economies of scale. (flash memory gets cheaper and larger)

So long as Sony doesn't push PVR functionality, the HD won't be a necessary part, and MS will have made the right move on all counts. (flash memory has a comparatively low rewrite lifespan. It'd be no good for swap space or constant use for large files. Eg: bad for PVR.)

The only thematic shift is that instead of being standard PC hardware, the neXtBox is shaping up to be more like standard Mac hardware.

And they're not showing nonexistant hardware. The part that remains in doubt is if they'll be announcing 'what's under the hood'. They'll be showing a live, functioning unit, but they're not sure if announcing the specs this early will be unnecessarily tipping their hand to Sony.

The only reason I hope the neXtBox isn't a spectacular failure, is because at this point Microsoft is the manufacturer who's pushing the envelope. Internet gaming (the way it should be) is in the living room, Sony is test-marketing console/PVR convergence devices in Japan, and Nintendo is correctly decades-old policy cockups (bad 3rd party dev relations, high royalties, 'content' image, etc).

Microsoft has brought serious competition to the console, and this competition is good for gamers.

Sony's Catch-22

[Dark Paladin]

Sony now has an interesting decision to make: reveal how the PS3 is going to act and look like with enough time to let developers make new games for it, or wait just long enough for Microsoft to shoot itself in the foot.

Sony's probably got most of the specs nailed down already, and their just going over the nit-pick details. If they're clever, they'll just make the system very modular with a range of products:

Regular PS3: No hard drive or ethernet/modem port, costs $299. Add in hard drive/ethernet is $99.

PS3/PSX: Basically the PSX now being sold in Japan, only with PS3 components. Tivo, satellite reciever, built in DVD burner, oh, yeah, and plays PS3 games, costs $700-900.

With this, they can delay right up until the last second what it's going to do and keep MS looking like an also-ran. Personally, I do find it disturbing that rather than blazing their own trail with what could be a great set of hardware (G5-ish chip and all), MS is just sitting back and "Well, whatever RAM they have, we'll have more! Our penis will be bigger!" approach.

Might please the fanboys, but personally, it just makes me want to give the Xbox 2 a long wait until I decide to get one, especially if it doesn't offer backwards compatibility. I have 3 consoles already - I don't need 4.