Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

J. Allard Responds to Hard Drive Criticism

Posted by Zonk on from the we're-right-how-dare-you-suggest-otherwise dept.

Edge Online is reporting on responses Xbox 360 platform chief J. Allard gave in response to questions regarding the hard drive on the Xbox 360. From the article: "I don't know who we've let down. There isn't a game on 360 that you can't play without a hard drive, so I think that's a good thing for consumers. We've made a commitment to broadening the audience, and while I think most of our energy here at X05 is about the hardcore, over time we're really setting the stage for making this a bigger category for everybody. So from the developer point of view you have the best tools and the commitment of the most well-resourced company in the world going worldwide with this product and saying that we want to grow the audience. So that seems like a win for developers - I'm not sure who's supposed to be disappointed."

15 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. But wait ! by GaelTadh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Without a harddrive how am I supposed to install linux on it and turn it into a cheap media center that runs mame ?

    --
    Search your logs like the web: splunk!
  2. Cost Cutting by ReverendHoss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think he missed the real point of the criticism with his defense. I think the idea of different tiers of packaging and possible upgrades is a good idea. But I think many people believe that internal storage is no longer one of the "optional" features that can be removed to cut the cost of the machine.

  3. They may not require an HD but... by Iriel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...the game could be crippled without one. Imagine when all the new maps come out for Halo3 and you're the one that can't play with your friends on Live because you don't have the HD to download the map-pack.

    They really need to give up the act about 'broadening our audience' for a while. Until this system costs less than I pay for my car each month, I don't think they'll be reaching for anybody but hardcore gamers.

    --
    Perfecting Discordia
    www.stevenvansickle.com
    1. Re:They may not require an HD but... by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "They may not require an HD but...the game could be crippled without one. Imagine when all the new maps come out for Halo3 and you're the one that can't play with your friends on Live because you don't have the HD to download the map-pack."

      Um... so? Not having a net connection would 'cripple' Halo, as well. Is Microsoft supposed to provide that for you, too?

      Enough of the dipshitted belly aching. Microsoft made the system upgradable and offered a cheaper version of the system. As an added bonus, a hard drive failure won't mean replacing the whole unit. As yet another added bonus, the drives are removable so you can physically carry them to a friend's house. Oh those evil bastards at Microsoft.

      Of all the things you could be bitching about with regards to the XBOX360, this is the stupidest by a rather large margin. Bitch about the controller being almost exactly like the PS2's. Bitch about the high price tag. (ready to cast your stones at Sony over that, too.) Bitch about the screenshots not looking all that advanced. Bitch about the same ol humdrum games being made for it. Bitch about EA supporting it. Bitch about Microsoft being a bunch of assholes. These are all great reasons to bitch. But a removable hard drive? Lighten up.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:They may not require an HD but... by DarkZero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They may not require an D but... the game could be crippled without one. Imagine when all the new maps come out for Halo3 and you're the one that can't play with your friends on Live because you don't have the HD to download the map-pack.

      I think you have it backwards. The problem isn't that the people without the hard drive won't be able to use that feature. The problem is that in order to accomodate those people, the game will never HAVE that feature to begin with. Take the PS2 for instance. Because not everyone has a modem, very few games are online, especially compared to the Xbox. Similarly, because not every 360 owner will have a hard drive, very few games for the 360 will use the hard drive feature.

  4. FFXI definately need a HD by Eugene · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is no way Final Fantasy XI can play WITHOUT a hard drive. It's really simple, MMORPG will always have patches and update contents. So unless M$ is dropping FFXI, or J. Allard isn't aware that FFXI will be ported to Xbox360, his statement is simply not true.

  5. The PS2 HDD developer fiasco... by neura · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with making it optional is that developers will never make any cool features for the HDD unless it's ubiquitous. I think that's the main reason Sony just did away with the HDD when releasing the PSTwo. Why would developers make games that even made use of it at all, much less required it, if it just alienated the people that did not have one.

    We may not see quite the same problem here, since at least it will exist as an option from the start, but no major developer is going to release a game that has any features supporting the HD without serious consideration of how it will effect the customers that don't have one.

    I also agree with the first reply, FFXI will NEED the HDD, but maybe he's just using Microsoft speak (poster #2) and saying that there are no games on the system NOW that require the HDD because there's technically no system available and no games available. Wouldn't be the first time MS abused "language loopholes" to pacify the audience...

  6. Sure, all games can run without one... by dividedsky319 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, all games can run without the hard drive...

    BUT, if ALL systems DID have the hard drive... that allows the game developers to utilize it to it's max potential.

    Imagine if the Revolution's controller was optional. An add-on of sorts. That kind of cripples the system. But since ALL the systems will have this extra ability, it means the developers can utilize it. Only having a fraction owning a particular accessory could scare developers away from actually using it.

    This, IMO, is why it's too bad that all the systems don't have the hard drive.

    1. Re:Sure, all games can run without one... by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Sure, all games can run without the hard drive...

      BUT, if ALL systems DID have the hard drive... that allows the game developers to utilize it to it's max potential.

      All Xbox's came with a hard drive. Hardly any developers took any real advantage of it other than being a giant memory card. Frankly, I don't blame Microsoft, why include something standard that a very few games make use of anyway?

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
    2. Re:Sure, all games can run without one... by neura · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is an excellent example of exactly why they should not make it optional. If it's optional, developers will be much less likely to use it. If it were built in, developers could count on taking advantage of it and therefore wouldn't mind investing the extra time and money into writing code to support it.

  7. No memory card by atarrri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is that there is an implication that you're saving 100 dollars by getting the cheaper model when in fact you will need to purchase a 40-dollar memory card to save games (something that is a fundamental requirement of modern gaming). Thus you will only save 60 dollars and get a much worse deal. A lot of people will be disappointed when they opt for the cheaper model and find out a few hours later that they still need to spend another 40 bucks before they can save their game.

    As it is I see this as a major mistake on Microsoft's part. They are making it more difficult for developers to take full advantage of their console just so some customers can save 60 dollars and still feel like they got ripped off.

    1. Re:No memory card by atarrri · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Slightly a different scenario with the PS2. There was no version of the system that came with a mem card much less a hard drive. In other words everyone that bought a system had to buy a memory card, there was no other option.

      All I'm saying is that some people will buy the $300 version and a game, bring it home, play it, that realize they can't save their game. Then they will pause the game and go back to the store and shell out 40 more bucks for a memory card and wish they just got the model with the hard drive, wireless controller, and other goodies. Most people I hope will realize that the $400 version is a better deal. Also let's not forget how the very existence of a sans-hard drive model causes an extra annoyance for developers.

  8. Re:Guess he doesn't know his own product... by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Stick it to the customer, very microsoft."

    Gee, they made the same decision that Apple, IBM, Sony, Nintendo, Dell, and OCP would have made. How uniquely evil of Microsoft.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  9. Re:again by Zangief · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Like they did with the original Xbox, when they fell on a large pile of NEGATIVE money?

  10. Less maintenence issues by shadwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On the bright side, has anyone noticed that since the hard drive is removable, when it does go out (and it will), all you need to do as Joe Blow average consumer is go buy a replacement drive for it? The hard drive and the dvd drive are the two most likely pieces to fail in the console. At least you won't be screwed when the hard drive craps out as in the original XBOX model. Notice that I'm talking about Joe Blow here - not you hot rod modders.