Slashdot Mirror


Elite Won't Replace Premium or Core Skus

As the day has progressed, more information about the 'Elite' has become available. GamesIndustry.biz is reporting that the other two 360 skus will still be available. The Elite is not replacing either of them. Interestingly, there's no word on a price drop for them either. Major Nelson's most recent podcast has several interviews and details about the new offering, which you may find informative. There's more analysis available, if you find that interesting: CVG wonders aloud who is going to buy this thing, while a Wedbush Morgan analyst mentioned to GamesIndustry.biz that he thinks this validates the PS3 strategy. "'It appears to me that Microsoft sees the writing on the wall - Blu-ray is going to win the format wars ... Ultimately, Microsoft will likely offer a Blu-ray drive with the 360 Elite, and I think consumers will be able to select based solely upon other drivers.' Pachter also believes that although the Xbox 360 Elite will register with early adopters of hi-def content, the current 20GB model will still be sufficient for many consumers."

158 comments

  1. If I don't care about HDMI... by AbsoluteXyro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is to stop me from buying a Core 360 and a 120GB HDD? If you don't care about HDMI, where's the value in the Elite SKU?

    1. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by trdrstv · · Score: 4, Funny
      What is to stop me from buying a Core 360 and a 120GB HDD? If you don't care about HDMI, where's the value in the Elite SKU?

      The core doesn't have a headset, and comes with composite cables, not the composite/component of the premium & elite. That and... it's black. Once you go black, you never go back.

    2. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by MarkAyen · · Score: 1

      If you don't care about HDMI (or paying separately for the larger drive), then there is effectively no advantage to buying the Elite SKU.

    3. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That and... it's black. Once you go black, you never go back.

      Always bet on black.</Snipes>
    4. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by krakelohm · · Score: 1

      Darker the meat... sweeter the treat baby.

      --
      You are all a bunch of idots.
    5. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Funny

      where's the value in the Elite SKU?

      If you believe in yourself, stay in drugs, drink your sku, and don't do milk, you'll go somewhere.

    6. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by tourvil · · Score: 2

      What is to stop me from buying a Core 360 and a 120GB HDD? If you don't care about HDMI, where's the value in the Elite SKU?

      The 120GB HDD is being sold separately for $180. Core + HDD = $300 + $180 = $480, the same price as the elite. Why would you not buy the elite if you wanted a new 360 with the 120GB HDD?

      So for everyone wondering why the hell MS is pricing the 120GB HDD accessory so high, there's why. They don't want people just picking up a core and upgrading them for cheaper than the elite.
    7. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The older the berry, the sweeter the juice.

      Fool, it's 'The blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice.'

      Yeah, we'll she blacker than a motherfarker too.

    8. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by AbsoluteXyro · · Score: 1

      Whoops! For some reason I thought the 120GB HDD was priced at $120. Thanks for clearing that up. The Elite SKU makes more sense, then.

    9. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the core units costs 299 and the 120 gig hard drive costs 179, then the total cost of that configuration will be 478, or $1 cheaper than the elite unit.

      In other words, nothing is stopping you except common sense. for an extra $1, you get: a wireless controller rather than a wired controller, a headset, hdmi output, a 1 month subscription to xbox live(gold) (which I believe doesn't come with the core set) and an hdmi cable.

      Frankly, there's a lot more value to be had in the elite if you are not already an owner.

    10. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by antek9 · · Score: 1

      No, it doesn't. When was the last time you bought a 120 Gig HDD for 180$, external or not? Like, 2004? It's political pricing, of course.

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
    11. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 1

      Buying a core ($300) and the 120 gb HD ($180) is about the same price as an Elite, give or take 10 dollars. But if you buy the core and the HD, not only will you not get HDMI, you won't get a wireless controller (you'll get a wired one), a voice chat headset for Xbox Live, an ethernet cable (no big whoop, I guess) or component cables (the Core only comes with an old school composite RCA cable, not the dual composite/component that the Premium and Elite have).

      So the Elite is really a better option for the vast majority of people if they are choosing between core + HDD and Elite, though the reason for this is because the stand-alone HDD is overpriced.

    12. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by BagOBones · · Score: 1

      360 uses laptop size 2.5" drives. I believe the LOWEST price in USD I have seen is $109 for a bare OEM drive, tack on the cost of the enclosure, transfer cable and software update to support transferring files and it adds up.

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    13. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by brjndr · · Score: 1

      The core also has a wired controller, not wireless. It can support wireless, it just doesn't come with one.

    14. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      I believe the LOWEST price in USD I have seen is $109 for a bare OEM drive, tack on the cost of the enclosure

      Actually, it makes the Elite price look sillier. Consider that the Premium system already comes with a hard drive/enclosure, then all you're doing is shipping a 120Gb drive instead of 20Gb. In the UK, that's a difference of about GBP15-20 (US$30-40) for me, as a consumer, to purchase a single 2.5" drive. I'm guessing Microsoft would get a better deal on hard drives than I do.

      So basically you're paying $140 ($180 - $40) for an HDMI port, an HDMI cable, a USB cable and a 'premium black finish'. Seems expensive. Mind you, some people seem to think nothing of dropping $60-$100 on an HDMI cable, so maybe it's not so dumb after all :-).

      and software update

      Software duplication costs are negligible, and I expect the group responsible for the drive migration software are considered a cost centre (at least, with respect to that software).

    15. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by dnahelix1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Plus, the hard drive is 179. So, you have the core at 300 + the 179 hard drive. = Elite + headset + wireless controllers

    16. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it's the Elite Sku. If you're satisfied with the newbie Sku or more likely you can't afford the Elite Sku, I guess that's fine.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    17. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by chrish · · Score: 1

      I'm going to wait for the L33T Sku.

      --
      - chrish
    18. Re:If I don't care about HDMI... by Alex+Berish · · Score: 1

      you moron. If you buy a core, you get a brain-dead machine that only plays games. It doesnt save them. Plus it doesn't come with a free month of xbox live gold... or a headset... or HD cables... or a wireless controller... or a free game (Hexic.) Now lets imagine you don't need that stuff because its SO expensive... so... you buy a core 360 ($299.99) and a 120GB hard drive ($179.99) and thats all you wanted...that totals $479.98... HOLY CRAP YOU SAVED YOURSELF A WHOLE PENNY OVER THE ELITE!!! and lost extra

  2. What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is everyone suddenly a merchandiser or something? I'll replace your sku.

    1. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sku you!

    2. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's worse than that, the SKU is the identifier, not the product. So unless they were going to use consoles to replace the ids in their databases (how do they fit anyway?), the article isn't going to tell us anything new.

    3. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      It's still not as bad as calling every musician an "artist" in the post-Napster world.

    4. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by TeknoHog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Death by sku-sku!

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    5. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by PoderOmega · · Score: 1

      Nothing costs anything anymore - goods and services just have price points.

    6. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by noidentity · · Score: 1

      You, sir, are not a cool person, because you don't use ultra-hip terms like SKU and merch (not an abbreviation).

    7. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Is everyone suddenly a merchandiser or something? I'll replace your sku.


      I was thinking the same thing the other week, I read an advertisement (something meant for the general public) and it actually referred to the "Star Wars [i]franchise[/i]" and it was something LucasFilm was involved in, it wasn't a competitor using the phrase. Since when is a word like that used in advertising? It practically screams "this is a studio cash cow" to me.
    8. Re:What the fuck is with SKU? It's a product. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      The RIAA calls them Artists. I guess it's like private prisons call the prisoners 'inmates' or (shudder) 'guests'.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  3. I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    470 dollars for the 360 itself
    100 dollars for WiFi
    200 dollars for the HD-DVD addon
    50 dollars a year to play games online - 250 dollars over five years

    There are no hardware changes other than the addition of the HDMI digital connection - so all of the existing hardware defects will exist with this model. The move to 65nm has been delayed to later this year. So you sure as hell better pay for an extended warranty.

    And that is not including all the little things like chargers that Microsoft is nickel and diming Xbox owners with.

    You are looking at spending ~820-1020 on this system over five years. WTF are they smoking up in Redmond?

    1. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by phorm · · Score: 5, Funny

      WTF are they smoking up in Redmond?

      At first it seemed to be dope due to the green color. At closer inspect, though, it turns out that it's dollar bills...

    2. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by MeanderingMind · · Score: 1

      I don't know what they're smoking, but I want to stay away from whatever it is.

      The price comparisons of the 360 and PS3 just got a lot more complicated, and not in Microsoft's favor. The new SKU is arguably less functional than the closely priced $500 PS3.

      I'm sure the idea looked good on paper, but ultimately I can only see this as hurting Microsoft's position.

      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    3. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by GrayCalx · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I see how this could hurt their position. They still have two other versions that are significantly (meh) lower than the PS3. This is just an option for those who... I don't know, like the color black (actually I think it would be for those who for some reason or another need the HDMI output) but still the upgrades are kind of silly.

      I definitely agree that this elite is not really worth the price, but they still have the other models available, so I don't see how this could hurt them, per-say.

    4. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by CaseM · · Score: 1

      This hurts them mostly because the perception of a price difference has changed. Most people who buy a game console aren't people like us who read spec sheets, weigh technical differences of various minutia and then argue about them ad nauseum - they just go to the local big box store and look at the sticker price. This new SKU tarnishes one of if not the biggest of Microsoft's strengths this generation: price.

    5. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by Southphillyman · · Score: 0

      THIS IS POWERFUL POSTING BABY. *clapping* lol, as a potential PS3 buyer I'm hoping M$ keeps doing stupid stuff like this. Blu ray is already winning the format wars

    6. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by iamacat · · Score: 1

      So you want a game system that costs just as much as a game-capable PC, has games that cost twice more than PC games, plays protected movies that you can not enjoy on the go and requires you to buy a separate PC and/or PVR? We should boycott both Microsoft and Sony until they come up with a better format. Nintendo may be more acceptable, since its much cheaper than a PC and has a technically unique controller, but they are being assholes by using an idiotic name in the US to please Chinese and artificially limiting supply and forcing hapless families to pay twice the price online.

    7. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe This Is Real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My house is wired, I don't want to pay for wireless, when I can be smart and use my existing infrastructure. You being a loser without a wired house shouldn't affect the price of MY 360.

      I don't want HD DVD, or Blu-ray. For a number of reasons, not the least of which, I'll eventually build a NAS array of maybe a few TB, for not too much money comparitively speaking, and with some shade of media computing something, be it myth or vista coupled with the 360, and perhaps FiOS, how long am I going to want to deal with disc's? The early versions of either standing a good chance of more incompatability down the road anyway. Right now, that's for rappers and Tony Hawk. Who knows maybe the DRM queens will come to their senses in later revivsions as well. And 13 months of xbox live costs 39.99 at Circuit City.

      But xbox live silver doesn't suck, just for being able to download the demos. Some of them are almost free games unto themselves.

  4. PS3 Advantage by tb3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But the PS3 advantage (if they can establish a price point and sell enough of the damn things) is that the Blu-Ray drive is standard. That means that the larger capacity can be used for game data. No matter what optional drives Microsoft ships for the 360, game designers will always be hobbled by the constraint of the DVD as the lowest common denominator.
    If the PS3 survives its games will end up looking a lot more impressive than 360 games of the same vintage.

    --

    www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    1. Re:PS3 Advantage by whodunnit · · Score: 1

      The medium the game comes on will not effect the quality of the game. True, they might have to make the game span more than one disk to fit the same amount of content. But that does not in any way mean the game will be of lower visual quality than the PS3 version.

      Multipule disk games happened all the time on the PSOne and other older systems, and since dvds are so cheap to produce it's not going to overly effect the bottom line.

    2. Re:PS3 Advantage by toolie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was wondering where you went. Whats the url to sign up for PS3 astroturfing and how well does it pay?

      --
      -- toolie
    3. Re:PS3 Advantage by kinglink · · Score: 5, Informative

      I work in a company that does open world games (and good ones actually). I have to tell you the "hobbling" isn't true. The 512 megs of ram that we have on the system is a bigger issue than anything that has to do with the media we are working on.

      Blu-ray sounds great but what do you need to fill it with. As it is the amount of money we pay to get the game shipped now is a lot. Cost is what's stopping us from making bigger or more diverse games, rather then size of the media again.

      The people who are hurt the most by this are the JRPG companies who just explode with FMVs, blue dragon is a 3 dvd game, other then them I've heard no complaints about the size of the media. Hell, The only reasons they are filling up Blu-rays are they are using "stupid" tricks like uncompressed audio for Metal gear solid. I just have a simple question. Now that both systems are out, and we already have seen that the 360's dvd has a higher read speed then the ps3's blu-ray device (overall blu-ray SHOULD be faster, but in these two actual system the 360's drive is faster). Why are you using larger files sizes rather then using the "extra" power of the ps3 to uncompress these files? The simple answer is no, the ps3 isn't that powerful (Insomniac today claims you have 8 cores? funny we only have access to 6 cores).

      In the end blu-ray isn't going to be the answer. Sony's system has some good marks, but blu-ray isn't necessary, and the Cell processor is doing more to hurt the developer than it is helping it.

      If anything the 360 developer's biggest problem has nothing to do with DVDs, it's due to the fact that the Hard drive is non standard and we can't guarantee using that for caching, but that's a relatively minor complaint in the long run.

    4. Re:PS3 Advantage by BeansBaxter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I find it very interesting that in this generation people are concerned about needing more than a dual layer dvd to store game content. I don't work in the industry but I have to think that filling 9Gigs of data is a pretty impressive and expensive feet. I imagine development costs will be much higher for a game that requires that amount of space. Packaging it on one really expensive new Blu Ray disk or multiple easy to press DVD's is probably the least of the worries.

    5. Re:PS3 Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Packaging it on one really expensive new Blu Ray disk or multiple easy to press DVD's is probably the least of the worries."

      BluRay disk prices for developers are a few cents more vs DVDs. BluRay disks are much cheaper than multiple DVDs. Publishers and developers HATE multi-disc titles. Needlessly eats into profits - take a million selling game multiply the cost of a second DVD(or even worse third) and you are throwing away a huge chunk of profits.

      GameCube games last gen for the most part had developers just chopping out features or music and audio to fit on the smaller GC discs.

      The 360 actually has LESS space than the Xbox did last gen and developers have already bumped up against the ~8 gigs of storage space. There are four to seven or so more years to go in this generation. Just think of how small a CD or two CDs are today for a game.

      As storage space increases so does the cost of generating content go down at a fairly similar rate. Computers get faster, memory gets larger so the size of models and worlds that artists can generate get larger and the tools for working with larger art continues to improve.

      MS if fucked on the storage front. There is no other way to put it.

    6. Re:PS3 Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      You sound like you come from a typical shitty pc developer like Bethesda.

    7. Re:PS3 Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the storage capacity of Blu-Ray has yet to be anything but an artifical advantage for games.

      So far PS3 developers are using it to either:
      a) Put all localizations on the same disc to cut on manufacturing costs
      b) Put a ton of pre-rendered high def cutscenes on the disc
      c) Duplicate data for faster loading times because the PS3's disc read speed is poor (Oblivion)

      No PS3 game has come close to the 9GB DVD limit in terms of actual game content and I suspect that's not going to change anytime soon. You'd be talking about a huge amount real game content to go over 9GBs. It already takes 3-4 years do develop a game with "as little" content as something like Gears of War. The development time of a game these days that uses over 9GB of conent would exceed the lifespan of the console.

      If you like pre-rendered cutscenes then yeah the 360 is at a disadvantage, if actually like playing games, then the DVD storage capacity is never going to be an issue.

    8. Re:PS3 Advantage by 644bd346996 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the PS3 survives its games will end up looking a lot more impressive than 360 games of the same vintage. Now that is funny.
      The PS3 just had the greatest console launch in history in Europe. No, the PS3 just had the best European launch of a console. That is not the same as "the best launch in history" with an implied comma and then "in Europe."

      The PS3 is selling at a faster rate in the US. That statement is meaningless. Faster than what? Faster than in Europe or Japan? Faster than the Wii?

      People are asking who do they have to kill to get into the Home beta. Only people at least as demented as you. And presumably as young or younger than you.

      Every single developer who supported the 115+ million selling PS2 is making games for the PS3. That is not saying much. What matters is how many games they are making for the PS3, and how many are exclusive to the PS3, as compared with the development scene for the 360 and to a lesser extent, the Wii.

      Sony's first party developer lineup is stronger than both Nintendo and Microsoft combined - there are over 150 first party games alone in development. Finally, some good (though uncited) information. But still, I have to wonder how many of those games will make it to the market, and how many are at all original. And you failed to provide any data about Microsoft and Nintendo to back up your claim that the are not being as prolific game developers.

      Even PC developers are looking to the PS3 for their games as the pc game market continues to die. That sure seems to be a totally baseless claim. In fact, I think it is probably totally wrong. First of all, not many developers would go through the trouble of porting a game from the PS3 to a platform that is dying faster. Second, the PC gaming market is not dying. Third, the portion of the PC gaming market that is composed of PS3 ports is, and always will be, very small.

      The PS3 has turned out to be the most reliable console ever made. By what measure? Sure, it seems to have gotten much less press about it's problems than the 360, but that doesn't make it the gold standard. Certainly the hardware can't be all that reliable, given the extreme complexity compared to the other consoles on the market. For example, the Cell processor in the PS3 has an SPU disabled because they can't produce the whole processor at mature yields. And the PS3 has not been on the market long enough to compare with, say, the GameCube. Also, with the exception of the wrist strap issue arising from improper but foreseeable usage, I expect the Wii to be the most reliable of the consoles, given the simplicity of its hardware and the fact that it is mostly already proven.

      Yeah, if the PS3 'survives'... The PS3 is by no means destined to come out on top or even in second. No games for any of the three platforms are out yet that were developed after feedback from the launch titles. And they still have been on the market for less than a year. For a product with an expected lifetime of at least five years, this is way too early to be making judgments with that level of confidence.

      Oh wait. You are referring to how Sony had to divert manufacturing capacity in last month from the US to Europe for the launch and there were low NPD numbers... It has been well documented that the PS3 has been in excess supply in many of the biggest markets in the US. With or without the European launch, Sony needed to divert production capacity away from the US. And I have yet to see any evidence that that diversion has caused any shortages in the US.
    9. Re:PS3 Advantage by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You sound like you're the AC troll who always tells people they don't know how to code just because they disagree that the PS3 is the second coming of Christ.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:PS3 Advantage by feepness · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't work in the industry but I have to think that filling 9Gigs of data is a pretty impressive and expensive feet.

      Also, 640K ought to be enough for everybody.

    11. Re:PS3 Advantage by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      First of all, a PC game developer would be used to having effectively unlimited storage space to work with, and thus would be most affected by the limitations of the DVD medium. But the GPP's point about disc capacity is valid. The largest single player game I have played was Myst 4, which came on two DVDs, and it was a pre-rendered game. Its sequel was rendered in realtime, and even though was a longer game, it fit on three CDs. If you fanboys are to believed, the 360/PS3 would never need to resort to pre-rendered graphics. When a console game has a soundtrack big enough to fill the better part of a DVD, let me know.

    12. Re:PS3 Advantage by Southphillyman · · Score: 0

      Uh the new Splinter Cell game was able to include new playable characters and TWO addition stages because of blu ray capacity. Don't deny facts baby.

    13. Re:PS3 Advantage by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Drive speed complaints are over played. The standardized HD completely negates any rational arguement about drivespeed. Even a direct comparrison of drive speeds shows a fairly slight difference. Also, disc space is a marginal advantage for the ps3. Built in blu-ray play back is a better advantage.

      The ps3 is a expensive machine. For my money it was worth it. At some price point I'm sure it would be worthwhile for most gamers. I only hope it survives to hit that price point.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    14. Re:PS3 Advantage by Neo_piper · · Score: 1

      The PS3 just had the greatest console launch in history in Europe.

      The PS3 is selling at a faster rate in the US.
      Just my little bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary
      In my little University town in Iowa, Best Buy, Wallmart, K Mart, Target, and the various non big box stores all have PS3s in stock...
      Now here is the kicker... They are all the same ones from the shipment back in the beginning of February.
      I took my digital camera and took some pictures of them showing the dust accumulate, they literally haven't moved in over 6 weeks
      By the way there is not a Wii to be had in this town...
    15. Re:PS3 Advantage by kinglink · · Score: 1

      If we are going to consider the HD an alternative to the drive, then you're installing games and drive speed is still part of an issue (not as big though). Play Tony Hawk Pro Skater 8 on the 360, it's a great game, however every time you take the disc out and put it back in you have a decently long 2-3 minute load time that's unskipable the first time you play it after that point, that's fine the first time but annoying every time you want to take a quick trip, the way they do it is a movie. I believe this is gone if you didn't have a HD hooked up.

      Still you're talking about a wait for the players. I'm all for utilizing the HD, but if I'm going to need to wait 5-15 minutes when I put Oblivion into my PS3, I'm going to get a little annoyed verses the 360 where there's a mandatory situation where you are only allowed 2 minutes of non interactive load times.

      Btw, the standardized hard drive assuming we're going to be using it gives an even less important for drive size, why not compress your files and install them the first time you're player runs the game?

      I do admit the standardized hard drive is a major feature. However my post is more about the fact that the blu-ray is an unnecessary feature for this generation. It's a 200 dollar addition to the game system and an attempt to get blu-ray into as many homes as possible to claim a "win" on the format war (personally neither format wins, an upscaled DVD is good enough on a 50 inch tv for me, and I don't have to rebuy my dvds and movies). If instead they put out a 400 dollar Ps3 with out blu-ray and then claimed some games will likely require the blu-ray add on it would have worked out better, but as a whole I can't say the blu-ray is a "win" for the consumers or developers, but it's a "win" for Sony and that's why it's included.

    16. Re:PS3 Advantage by valathax · · Score: 1
      Splinter Cell on the Xbox 360 is 6.15 GB, two additional maps and one extra playable character does not consume over 2 gigabytes. In addition Ubi has made no mention of there being a size constraint on the Xbox 360 as the reason for the additional content on the PS3.

      http://splintercell.us.ubi.com/newspost.php?news_i d=4905

    17. Re:PS3 Advantage by j.a.mcguire · · Score: 1

      It might be a games console but it's as much an entertainment centre as well these days, therefore blue ray is a requirement since most future high definition movie formats will be available in it.

      It's good for the consumer, not only the developer.

    18. Re:PS3 Advantage by yoyhed · · Score: 1

      Yes, because I'm sure a couple extra models and levels (probably using mostly the same textures as the rest of the game) absolutely could not fit in 9 gigs.

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
    19. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrXym · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The people who are hurt the most by this are the JRPG companies who just explode with FMVs, blue dragon is a 3 dvd game, other then them I've heard no complaints about the size of the media. Hell, The only reasons they are filling up Blu-rays are they are using "stupid" tricks like uncompressed audio for Metal gear solid.

      No, there are plenty of other reasons. Localization for example - being able to offer the same game in multiple locales from the same disk. Something which is very important in the EU, or even when considering US / JP titles. Aside from that extra capacity means more content, levels, or if you prefer just the ability to duplicate data to lessen seek times and ensure it loads faster.

      Simply put, companies don't have to use that extra capacity, but neither is there some barrier blocking their path when they get close to DVD-9's limits. Which many games already manage to get close to.

      I just have a simple question. Now that both systems are out, and we already have seen that the 360's dvd has a higher read speed then the ps3's blu-ray device (overall blu-ray SHOULD be faster, but in these two actual system the 360's drive is faster).

      So says you. Most other people appear to think that Blu-Ray has a slight edge but both systems are mostly comparable.

      Why are you using larger files sizes rather then using the "extra" power of the ps3 to uncompress these files? The simple answer is no, the ps3 isn't that powerful (Insomniac today claims you have 8 cores? funny we only have access to 6 cores).

      Insomniac did not say that. It said "The PS3's eight parallel CPUs (one primary "PPU" and seven Cell processors) give it potentially far more computing power than the three parallel CPUs in the Xbox 360". What is incorrect about that statement?

      As for compression, compression only gets you so far. Sure you could zip everything up or make textures and sound more lossy. Lots of games probably do it already simply because it may work out slightly faster than reading uncompressed from disk. But there comes a point where with all the compression in the world you still have more content than you can fit on the disk. What do you do then? Do you cut levels, or textures, or models, go multi-disk or expect people to do sizable downloads to get the content?

      In the end blu-ray isn't going to be the answer. Sony's system has some good marks, but blu-ray isn't necessary, and the Cell processor is doing more to hurt the developer than it is helping it.

      There is nothing particularly hard about programming the Cell. Any software engineer worth their salt (i.e. the kind responsible for writing game engines, optimized code etc.), should be able to master it easily enough and the people doing periphery stuff like menu systems shouldn't have to care. SPU programming is little removed from multi-threading and most of the principles can be carried over to it.

    20. Re:PS3 Advantage by antek9 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This sort of anecdotal evidence keeps popping up in every console wars related thread. I'm not even saying any of that stuff is made up. But maybe we should start worrying about the American economy when no one in your tiny University towns can afford the technologically supreme console any more this time around.

      It's called a recession and you know it. People here in Europe, we just thought: Yup, this is the best system, must get it. I went out and got one, without second thoughts or regrets. Man, people do spend more than 600 EUR on frigging CELLPHONES, year after year, and suddenly that price is asking too much for a BluRay drive, a Cell chip, 60 GB disc, Bluetooth, WiFi and whatnot combined? Hell, it even runs Linux. Are American buyers really that kind of cheapskates nowadays? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought your wages were higher than ours.

      Note to moderators: go ahead and mod me a troll, if you like, but rest assured: this is my honest opinion, and I'm just asking questions out of curiosity. Mind the condescending tone, but I'm really sick of all that cheap schadenfreude about unsellable PS3s while at the same time whining about the unavailability of Wii consoles (a.k.a. Gamecube V1.5). You people are doing yourself a disservice. Well, flamebait then, I guess.

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
    21. Re:PS3 Advantage by Southphillyman · · Score: 0

      Just don't be surprised if a lot of cross platform games benefit more from using the benefits of the Cell and bluray storage.

    22. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrXym · · Score: 1

      It would be interesting if the guy was from Bethesda. Oblivion was something like 5 times the size of Morrowind which came before it. I wonder what Oblivion would have been like if it had been constrained to fit on a single CD.

    23. Re:PS3 Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. I want some of what you're smoking.

      The stock market? Up.

      Interest? Down.

      Unemployment? Down.

      Average number of Americans who OWN their home? Up.

      Size of the home? Nearly double average from 1960.

      Taxes? Low(er).

      Average income? Higher.

      No, it's called, people don't give a shit about the PS3.

    24. Re:PS3 Advantage by antek9 · · Score: 1

      Currency? Down, down, down.

      Nuff said. Sorry, I had to bite.

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
    25. Re:PS3 Advantage by kinglink · · Score: 1

      "Simply put, companies don't have to use that extra capacity, but neither is there some barrier blocking their path when they get close to DVD-9's limits. Which many games already manage to get close to."

      That's fine however localization is NOT a major space concern. Not many games are close to breaking dvd-9s limits. At least not as many as Sony would like to tell you. Oblivion which is a freaking enormous game that is not even topping out. Those who believe they can't fit a game on a dvd isn't doing it efficiently or just are looking for excuses.

      "So says you. Most other people appear to think that Blu-Ray has a slight edge but both systems are mostly comparable."

      Are you freaking kidding me? I'm not talking about edges I'm not talking "which is better" I'm talking, we ran simulations of streaming and in every test the PS3 drive is SLOWER. This has been confirmed by almost every report out there.

      "Insomniac did not say that. It said "The PS3's eight parallel CPUs (one primary "PPU" and seven Cell processors) give it potentially far more computing power than the three parallel CPUs in the Xbox 360". What is incorrect about that statement?"

      Yeah potential. Potential gets you nothing in the real world., when you can't use all 8 cores. The PS3 is an amazing crunching machine, it's built for Folding at home, but for game programming it's not the best machine, especially if you're looking at something like an open world game, the Ps3 just isn't built around branching paths.

      "There is nothing particularly hard about programming the Cell. Any software engineer worth their salt (i.e. the kind responsible for writing game engines, optimized code etc.), should be able to master it easily enough and the people doing periphery stuff like menu systems shouldn't have to care. SPU programming is little removed from multi-threading and most of the principles can be carried over to it."

      I guess our company completely sucks then. Except we don't, the system itself has a huge amount of problems (and no we arn't the only ones), whether it's the fact that out of the 6 active cores, one's dedicated to graphics card, and another 4 only has access to 128 megs of that 512 megs or ram (before you have to start doing DMA calls, which anyone should tell you will kill your frame rate). Yeah the cell programming is easy, if you make a game specifically designed for the cell processor. We are game programmers, we make games on platforms. Most of our time should be on our game not on making out game work on the platform. The 360 makes that easy, the Ps3 does not.

    26. Re:PS3 Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow. 7 digit UID.

      how much is Sony paying you?

    27. Re:PS3 Advantage by DevStar · · Score: 1

      "There is nothing particularly hard about programming the Cell. Any software engineer worth their salt (i.e. the kind responsible for writing game engines, optimized code etc.), should be able to master it easily enough and the people doing periphery stuff like menu systems shouldn't have to care. SPU programming is little removed from multi-threading and most of the principles can be carried over to it."

      OK, you're clearly not a developer. The Cell is a bear to get good and correct code on. Plus Sony/IBM doesn't do much to help. I had suggested to them early in the development that they should only consider a Cell like architecture if they could help the developers write to it, and they didn't. They're paying now because so many major game shops aren't getting great perf on the PS3.

    28. Re:PS3 Advantage by dank+zappingly · · Score: 1

      The other advantage being you don't have to pay for 2 different optical drives.

    29. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      I work in a company that does open world games (and good ones actually). I have to tell you the "hobbling" isn't true. Insomniac would like to disagree with you.

      If you ever hear someone say "Blu-Ray isn't needed for this generation," rest assured they don't make games for a living. At Insomniac, we were filling up DVDs on the PS2, as were most of the developers in the industry. We compressed the level data, we compressed the mpeg movies, we compressed the audio, and it was still a struggle to get it to fit in 6 gigs. Now we've got 16 times as much system RAM, so the level data is 16 times bigger. And the average disc space of games only gets bigger over a console's lifespan. As games get bigger, more advanced and more complex, they necessarily take up more space. If developers were filling up DVDs last generation, there are clearly going to be some sacrifices made to fit current generation games in the same amount of space.

      Granted, some really great Xbox 360 games have squeezed onto a DVD9. Gears of War is a beautiful game and shows off the highest resolution textures of anything yet released, partly because of the Unreal Engine's ability to stream textures. This means that you can have much higher resolution textures than you could normally fit in your 512 MB of RAM. It also means that you're going to chew up more disc space for each level. With streamed textures, streamed geometry and streamed audio, even with compression, you can quickly approach 1 GB of data per level. That inherently limits you to a maximum of about 7 levels, and that's without multiplayer levels or mpeg cutscenes.

      Sometimes people ask us, "If Resistance takes 14 gigabytes, why doesn't it look better than Gears?" Well, for one, Resistance didn't support texture streaming, so we had to make choices about where we spent our high-res textures. Resistance also had 30 single-player chapters, six multiplayer maps, uncompressed audio streaming, and high-definition mpegs. That all added up to a lot of space on the disc. Starting with Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction we are supporting texture streaming, which will make the worlds look even better, and will also consume even more space on disc.

      There's no question that you can always cut more levels, compress the audio more, compress the textures more, down-res the mpeg movies, and eventually get any game to fit on a DVD. But you paid for a high-def experience, right? You want the highest resolution, best audio, most cinematic experience a developer can offer, right? That's why Blu-Ray is important for games, and why it will become more important each year of this hardware cycle.
    30. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      I expect the Wii to be the most reliable of the consoles, given the simplicity of its hardware and the fact that it is mostly already proven.

      There have actually been a few issues with bricking during firmware upgrades and also graphical artifacts due to poor heatsink installation. My Wii is suffering from the second problem, and it's annoying as hell.

      I haven't heard anything bad about the PS3's reliability (yet, at least).

    31. Re:PS3 Advantage by DanJ_UK · · Score: 1

      We work to live, we don't live to work.

      US citizens start working at a younger age, work much further into their retirement years and work longer hours than those in the EU in order to maintain their 'higher income' image.

      You only have a higher employment rate due to the various age group differences amongst statistics, you work more years overall than us.

      That study in 2006 also showed you spend 60% more on healthcare and are much, much unhealthier, physically and mentally. I've encountered numerous Americans visiting this country that turn to a 'shrink' as soon as anything bothers them about their life, I can't generalise here but from what I hear it's pretty much the same on the other side of the pond.

      Unfortunately house prices have been driven up by a combination of property developers looking to invest in a currency that isn't as weak as the dollar, that and lack of space.

      Your size of home and the numbers of which own their own home are merely down to these facts, particularly the UK. Secondary to that is the sheer price of houses here due to the lack of new property development (space & planning) and those people that have bought all the available houses as investments.

      Overall there maybe less money over here, but it has more value than it does over there, the typical American attitude is more = better.

      Basically in a nutshell, your statements have pretty much f*ck all to do with the popularity of the PS3 in the US, you could throw any combination of "Europeans have no interest in xx product because of xx irrelevant issues." out there.

      You don't have Eurovision either, which is obviously one of the greatest annual events in the world.
      /sarcasm

      --
      - Dan
    32. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That's fine however localization is NOT a major space concern. Not many games are close to breaking dvd-9s limits. At least not as many as Sony would like to tell you. Oblivion which is a freaking enormous game that is not even topping out. Those who believe they can't fit a game on a dvd isn't doing it efficiently or just are looking for excuses.

      And how much larger is Oblivion than its predecessor? How much larger is Oblivion if you tossed in Shivering Isles? Could Bethesda even produce a 360 "Gold Edition" of Oblivion with all the expansions tossed in? If they can it must be getting pretty tight. Did you know that Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind fit on a CD? What a pointless argument it would have been when Morrowind appeared to claim no other game needs more than a CDs worth of space. What a pointless argument it is today when a quick trip to a torrent site will show that 360 games are already close to the DVD-9 limit.

      Are you freaking kidding me? I'm not talking about edges I'm not talking "which is better" I'm talking, we ran simulations of streaming and in every test the PS3 drive is SLOWER. This has been confirmed by almost every report out there.

      No it hasn't. I've seen comparative studies which say the opposite, that since the BD drive has a constant data rate it is sometimes faster and sometimes slower than DVD drives, but overall the transfer rate is comparable. The difference however is so slight that it makes no odds, especially when the PS3 has the BD capacity to repeat data (thus making it faster because seek times are lower), and even a hard disk that any game can use as a cache or for preloading data.

      As you mentioned Oblivion, duplicated data is an obvious way to speed it up. Assuming you have the space. The game uses enormous archives (think .zip files) containing all the meshes and textures within the game. Meshes are in one file, textures in another, sound in another etc. So to load a scene means hopping from one archive to another, extracting the data, all of which incurs a seek penalty. Rearranging the data in the way it is most commonly used could have a marked impact on load times. Assuming the disk has the space to do this, and possibly not something which might be afforded when you're stuck with DVD-9. For example, Oblivion players spend a lot of time hopping in and out of houses, so it would make sense to duplicate all the house models and textures and put them in their own file as well as in the general archives so they get loaded without all the seeking. And caching common textures on the hard disk too of course.

      Yeah potential. Potential gets you nothing in the real world., when you can't use all 8 cores. The PS3 is an amazing crunching machine, it's built for Folding at home, but for game programming it's not the best machine, especially if you're looking at something like an open world game, the Ps3 just isn't built around branching paths.

      Yes potential. Do you think a new console should have its potential realised in its first released titles? What a silly thing to say. Developers get better, SDKs get better, code gets written that can be incrementally improved. I know there will be a lot of dross for the system (and lots of lazy 360 ports), but there will also be plenty of games which optimise for the Cell or use APIs like Havok or Unreal Engine which have been optimised for them. Games like Resistance and Motorstorm show quite clearly that the potential is there.

      I guess our company completely sucks then. Except we don't, the system itself has a huge amount of problems (and no we arn't the only ones), whether it's the fact that out of the 6 active cores, one's dedicated to graphics card, and another 4 only has access to 128 megs of that 512 megs or ram (before you have to start doing DMA calls, which anyone should tell you will kill your frame rate). Yeah the cell programming is easy, if you make a game specifically designed for the cell processor. We are game programmers, we make games on platf

    33. Re:PS3 Advantage by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Actually I am a developer. IBM's own libspe (and libspe2) are even modelled after the pthreads API because SPUs are essentially specialised hardware threads. If you can program threads you can program the Cell. The challenge is not the Cell but in factoring your game to keep the SPUs filled with work to do. This concept is little different than keeping multiple threads filled with work to do. Either way you still need to think how to parallelize your work, how to break it down into jobs, how to dispatch it, how to wait or asynchronously receive results, how to collate it, and how to do all of this 30 or 60 times a second.

      If people can manage it for the 360, then they can manage it for the PS3.

    34. Re:PS3 Advantage by LKM · · Score: 1

      I bought a PS3 yesterday. After reading your post, I regret it.

    35. Re:PS3 Advantage by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

      I just sent mine back on Monday due to white and black pixels firing randomly. I didn't even bother reading up on it. I just called Nintendo and they sent me a UPS label. Free shipping both ways. They said it should take about two weeks from start to finish. It might be worth your time to give them a call.

    36. Re:PS3 Advantage by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Oblivion has been recently released and I have not heard of 5-10 min initial load times. I have heard of Dungeon load times are 50%-75% less thent he 360 due to HD caching. As for drive speeds the Xbox lists their peak speed (outside track) while the PS3 lists their average speed (inside/outside average). The average for both is not that far apart (x6.5 (DVD/Blu-ray) vs x~8.0(DVD)). Also there are many complaints of the noise level of the Xbox DVD. The HD negates any real effect on the game itself because there is a lot of opportunities to precache. Intelligently used you can have a minimial load time initially and a gradiual reduction during play to pulling everything from the HDD after a dozen minutes of play.

      As for blu-ray. I appriciate the quality improvement on my 50' HDTV. I do in fact notice the difference between the two versions of casino royale I have. 1 I bought on blu ray, 1 bought for me by my GF who didn't know any better. The difference isn't slight and there are noticable upscaling artifacts in any of the dark scenes. If you don't notice a difference you are in fact blind.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  5. Disappointed by MBraynard · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Disappointed that this is a worse value than the PS3. I have a 360. I gave one to my brother and to my sister; I was thinking about handing mine off to my mom and getting the Elite, but it almost isn't worth it.

    I guess I'm just repeating the normal mantra: needs the HD-DVD built in and Wireless built in. Right now it's 480+200+100. I find the price of the little wireless device most eggregious even now and wonder why there are not third party devices out there that can do the wireless.

    1. Re:Disappointed by clontzman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just to play Devil's advocate (this is /., after all), but seeing as you've given away one Xbox and may be on the verge of giving away a second one, you should probably be glad they're not bundling in HD-DVD, because then you'd have bought three HD-DVD drives instead of one or none. In your case, you can buy one HD-DVD drive and keep it if you decide to upgrade to the Elite or the Elite 2 on down the road. Same deal with the WiFi adapter... even though I think they should probably include it, it's a benefit for those who are upgrading to the Elite that they don't because you're not unnecessarily paying for it again if you have the add-on already.

      I don't totally disagree with what you're saying, but just another perspective.

    2. Re:Disappointed by bilbravo · · Score: 1

      I'll do the same to you... why buy an Xbox360 Elite if you already have an Xbox360? Chances are if HDMI and the larger hard drive means that much to you, you can sell that wireless adapter along with the old(er) xbox360 and get some/most of your money back from it. Not including the wireless on the Elite was for the same reason MS didn't include it on the others... people will pay $100 for it.

    3. Re:Disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I find the price of the little wireless device most eggregious even now and wonder why there are not third party devices out there that can do the wireless."

      Well, actually, there are third party alternatives that can do the wireless, although maybe not as well. Like this which isn't exactly any cheaper anyway. Or if you want cheaper, there's this although it's outdated, it should still work fine.

    4. Re:Disappointed by goodenoughnickname · · Score: 4, Funny

      I gave one to my brother and to my sister; I was thinking about handing mine off to my mom
      I hope I'm related to you somehow.
    5. Re:Disappointed by clontzman · · Score: 1

      Frankly, unless HDMI is a deal-maker for you, I'm not sure why you would. I was responding to the GP's post, though, and he was considering giving away a second 360 in order to buy an Elite. In his case, not having to re-buy HD-DVD drives and WiFi adapters is potentially a good thing. I like my Premium and have no real desire to buy an Elite (though the HDD space would eventually be nice).

      Of course, you're right about the WiFi being external primarily because people will pay for it. That said, it's only marginally more expensive than a third-party wireless bridge, so clearly everyone's keeping prices for this sort of add-on artificially high.

    6. Re:Disappointed by Is0m0rph · · Score: 1

      A few years ago I bought the original Xbox wireless adapter brand new for $50 off Ebay. It works fine on my 360 now so there's definitely cheaper alternatives.

    7. Re:Disappointed by MBraynard · · Score: 1

      I gave away two 360s. They both have HDTVs but not 1080ps. I figure they can get the wireless (or stay wired) and the HD-DVD if they want. Mom doesn't have an HDTV, but the 360 would be for DDR and casual games.

  6. Agreed! by thecalster · · Score: 1

    I agree with the comment that was quoted. Microsoft would have done a lot better making this Elite edition use either blu-ray or use the HD Drive. Allow it to play HDdvds or Blu-rays would have been reason to buying the elite edition. Even though they do have the HD drive you can install, but not everyone wants to go to the hastle to install extra stuff.

  7. Why? by MeanderingMind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why did Microsoft do this?

    Releasing a console with built-in HD-DVD would be interesting. Though there are potential reasons to avoid this.

    1) Price being too close to the PS3, in some ways validating it.
    2) No guarantee of success and thus subsidizing of the HD-DVD drive.

    But that said, decided not to include an HD-DVD drive pratically makes the whole thing a wash. Without the HD-DVD drive, all we have is a more expensive premium console that has a larger hard drive, HDMI hookups, and is black.

    Without any truly tangible benefit, it shrinks the extremely important price difference between the consoles. My points 1 and 2 above apply in almost the exact same way.

    1) Price too close the the PS3, in some ways validating it.
    2) Lack of backing of HD-DVD can be seen as implying a lack of confidence in the medium.

    The whole thing seems ill-conceived. If they didn't want to release a console with an built-in HD-DVD drive, they could have simply upgraded live and announced a new, larger hard drive alone and perhaps a black case mod for the first 1000 buyers. A whole new SKU for this is a ridiculous waste of resources, while at the same time killing several key talking points for the 360.

    --
    Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Without any truly tangible benefit, it shrinks the extremely important price difference between the consoles.

      The price difference was only important in fanboy eyes. Gamers have always bought the console that had the games they want to play on it. Always have, always will. A 100 or 200 dollar price difference means nothing for a product you will be using for five or more years. No gamers would trade a 100 bucks to give up an entire console generation's exclusive games they want to play.

      The lack of a matching black HD-DVD drive is a big FU to the handful of 360 owners who spend 200 dollars on their drives. There really isn't a clearer signal from Microsoft that they are walking away from the loser in the BluRay vs HD-DVD war.

    2. Re:Why? by MooseMuffin · · Score: 1

      Agreed entirely. Theres nothing wrong with the elite as a machine. HDMI and a larger drive is good. Not including an HD-DVD is fine too since nobody really cares about these formats. This just isn't the right way to position it and this wasn't the right time to launch it.

      Microsoft has the upper hand for the time being with its large game library and installed base, and after being out for close to a year and a half its probably gotten cheaper to make. If they were smart they would have dropped the price of both the core and the premium by $50 each and launched this thing at $400. If thats too much of financial hit for them then they should have waited 6 months and done it then.

      All they've done is reduce the desirability of the premium, and weaken the perceived price advantage over the PS3.

    3. Re:Why? by MeanderingMind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No gamers would trade a 100 bucks to give up an entire console generation's exclusive games they want to play.


      When I was 10 I did just that. I bought a Sega Genesis because it meant I could get two games right off the bat instead of just one.

      Would I do that now? No, but I still was a gamer then and only had allowance money to work with, $100 was a big deal.

      Not to mention that a higher price and another SKU only serve to alienate the non-gamers and casuals further. :/
      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    4. Re:Why? by LoudMusic · · Score: 1

      2) Lack of backing of HD-DVD can be seen as implying a lack of confidence in the medium. I think this is the single most important element of the post. If Microsoft aren't giving a thumbs up to HD-DVD that means they think Blu-Ray is going to be the big format. They're saying, whether intentionally or not, that Sony's technology is going to be the 'standard', and Sony's PS3 is the cheapest way to get a Blu-Ray player. By not including an HD-DVD reader Microsoft might have seriously screwed up an otherwise shiny console generation for themselves.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    5. Re:Why? by Itchyeyes · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Actually the why is pretty simple.

      From an article I originally posted here:http://vgecon.blogspot.com/2007/03/purpose-of -xbox-360-elite.html.

      The answer is that the Xbox 360 Elite is aimed at people who are willing to pay $479 for an Xbox 360. That may seem a little too simplistic, so I'll explain. One basic rule of economics is that a product's price is partially determined by how much the consumer values it. However, every individual has their own concept of what the product is worth. Ideally a manufacturer would want to sell to every customer at exactly what they're willing to pay, as long as it's higher than the cost of producing the product. Unfortunately this is just not practical in the real world, especially with a large volume product. Just because someone is willing to pay a certain amount doesn't mean that they won't pay less if they can. People would find out that you're selling the product to others for less and demand that price even if they would have been willing to pay more.

      There are two alternatives to this. First, you could set a single price; but this is a gamble. If you price too high you will lose sales to people who valued the product less. If you price too low, you lose profit margins from people who would have been willing to pay more. The other alternative is to still set your product at multiple price points but vary each version slightly. An excellent example of a company that uses this tactic is Starbucks. A regular coffee at Starbucks is only around $1.60; but a double foam mocha latte... whatever can cost you upwards of $4.00. In truth, both products cost Starbucks approximately the same amount of money to make. Price sensitive customers will choose the regular coffee, and people who are willing to pay more may spring for the more extravagant drink.

      This is what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox 360. Sure, the Premium costs Microsoft more to make than the Core, and the Elite costs them more then the Premium; but it's less than most people think. Microsoft may still be losing money on the Core, but they're probably breaking even on the Premium at this point. At $479, the Elite might even turn a small profit.

      Some people have pointed out that the new price tag erases Microsoft's price advantage over the $500 PS3. From a marketing perspective, it may seem that way. From an economics perspective though, things are still very different. The key point is that Microsoft is going to be ready for a price cut far sooner than Sony will be. Before the Elite, a price cut would have meant that they would have to sacrifice any profits from people who were still willing to pay top dollar for a system. A new high end model allows them to maintain their position in the $400 range, while extending their market by dropping the low end of their price range.

      I am no marketing expert, so I can't really say what the effects will be there. Economically though, this is a smart move by Microsoft.
    6. Re:Why? by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 0

      Sounds good and similar to the strategy that Apple is deploying IMO. First price the products at a very high price that only a small fraction of the consumers will pay and gradually lower it to somewhat above average prices over the long run. Thus they extract as much money from the market as possible (or at least more than by entering the market at a lower price directly). This simplifying explanation probably ignores the fact that some people will choose from an alternative if the wanted product is overpriced for too long but as Microsoft is still offering standard versions for less money this should not be a problem at all.

    7. Re:Why? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      1) Price being too close to the PS3, in some ways validating it.

      I thought that the price of the XB360 + HD-DVD add-on was the same price as the premium PS3, so I just don't see this. As long as they don't kill the other verions, I don't see it as a validation. I also don't see offering a DVD-only console as lack of confidence because not many gamers care about that right now. Maybe two or three years from now, things will be different. I think one can be confident in something and still not force people into going along with it if they just want your game console and not a movie player. The former is OK, the latter is just being belligerent.

    8. Re:Why? by iainl · · Score: 1

      I think we're all being rather a bit too paranoid about the reasoning here.

      The drive in the 360 is a 16x DVD ROM drive. The drive in the HD-DVD add-on can only do 8x DVD ROM reading, judging from the spec sheets for Toshiba's equivalent PC drive.

      360 games are designed to play from the 360's drive, and so can assume that read speeds will be as per the 16x drive. Switching to a slower drive is bound to introduce problems. So they've not done it.

      Sure, I'd like a HD-DVD drive in there instead if it still played games at full speed. But if we can't have it, then we can't have it.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    9. Re:Why? by GWBasic · · Score: 1

      But that said, decided not to include an HD-DVD drive pratically makes the whole thing a wash. Without the HD-DVD drive, all we have is a more expensive premium console that has a larger hard drive, HDMI hookups, and is black.

      Which makes the new XBox a perfect device for HD movie downloads! Bill Gates claims that HD movie downloads will beat both BluRay and HD-DVD.

  8. Blu-Ray by *weasel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It appears to me that Microsoft sees the writing on the wall - Blu-ray is going to win the format wars

    It appears to me that Microsoft is acknowledging the format wars are stillborn. Their support for HD-DVD was just about defusing the PS3 anyway, not defeating Blu-Ray. MS already has their license fees secured, regardless of how the little-plastic disc formats fare.

    The media victory Microsoft is after, is digital delivery.
    --
    // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    1. Re:Blu-Ray by bumchick · · Score: 0

      MS already has their license fees secured What license fees do you mean?
    2. Re:Blu-Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media victory Microsoft is after, is digital delivery.


      What makes you think they want to do that much work?

      They're after the DRM and that's it. They want to get a check every time somebody buys content. They don't want to actually incur any real costs. Do you have any idea what it would do to their margins if they actually had to stay in the content delivery business? Let some other poor fool do that. They just want to get in your wallet with zero additional effort.

      That's why there will never be a Microsoft product on top of my television, even if they manage to come out with a substantial number of XBox games I'm even remotely interested in.
    3. Re:Blu-Ray by Chokolad · · Score: 1

      Both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD standards include VC1 codec which is actually WMV.

    4. Re:Blu-Ray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The media victory Microsoft is after, is digital delivery."

      You don't need to pay fifty bucks to access iTunes. Perhaps they're looking for victory elsewhere.

  9. Prices by Applekid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Prices are funny. Microsoft is obviously milking every dime they can get out of gamers who buy a system before they drop the prices. While there is no sign of that happening, you can pretty much count on any PS3 price drop to be matched by a 360 price drop of equal or greater value.

    That "validation" of the PS3 strategy by way of price is a bit misleading, though. Sony equates the PS3 to fine equipment whose price indicates its value. But it's a genuinely expensive device to make. What the PS3 price points have proven to the people who figure out the prices of consoles is that consoles have been too cheap and the market could sustain them at higher prices than previously thought.

    Other very expensive consoles have gone down in flames for home use... but the median price for the majority of consoles at the market at any given time has been a $200 - $250 sweet spot. The only thing that Microsoft and Sony have done is show that the sweet spot can be coaxed higher.

    What I don't understand is why Microsoft isn't playing a price war yet. They've got the biggest userbase for this generation, most established games (excluding Wii's ability to play Gamecube games), and they're turning a profit on current consoles sold. Sony's machine costs $800 and putting pressure on them to lower a price point could hasten any future demise... if it's in the cards.

    My only stab at trying to understand is that Microsoft eventually wants to buy the Sony gaming division, but I'll be the first to suggest that's an outrageous claim. Hmmm...

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
    1. Re:Prices by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      What I don't understand is why Microsoft isn't playing a price war yet. They've got the biggest userbase for this generation, most established games (excluding Wii's ability to play Gamecube games), and they're turning a profit on current consoles sold. Sony's machine costs $800 and putting pressure on them to lower a price point could hasten any future demise... if it's in the cards.


      And conveniently not mentioning the PS3's ability to play PS2 and PS1 games.

      At the immediate moment, the 360 does have more native games than the other, you are correct, but they lose completely on the total library, they're last place. AND there are more games in the pipes for the PS3 than there are for the 360 last time I checked. It seems very likely, as it's already happening, that just about everything that comes out on the 360 will come out on the PS3 as well, but not vice versa. Just a thought.
      --
      No Comment.
    2. Re:Prices by Applekid · · Score: 1

      I'll concede I forgot to mention PS2 and PS1 games. I also forgot the 360 plays some XBox games. :P

      The PS2 definitely had more show stopping quality games than Gamecube and is a great asset to the PS3's playable library... PROVIDED that the recently crippled backwards compatibility gets continually less crippled with time. On that same token, I certainly want to see much better backwards compatibility on the 360 at a much faster pace.

      AFAIK, Wii's Gamecube backwards compatibility does not exist in a software emulation layer, which is probably why I've already eliminated from my mind the 360 AND the PS3 BC.

      But I'll take issue that "just about everything that comes out on the 360 will come out on the PS3 as well, but not vice versa" when the unshakeable list of exclusive titles already has the first defector, Devil May Cry. I won't humor rumors that Final Fantasy is going that way, though, but rumors are rumors and sometimes that grain of salt one should take rumors with is completely necessary.

      The only system that's going to get true exclusives that can't be ported without major retooling of the games themselves is the Wii. PS3/360? Ah, not so much.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    3. Re:Prices by Itchyeyes · · Score: 1

      I don't think Microsoft's margins are as good as you think they are. If they're turning a profit on any consoles at this point, it's probably only the Premium and it's probably still rather slim. For the time being there's not much reason for them to lower the prices as the $499 PS3 is virtually impossible to find and there is still a rather large price gulf between the Xbox 360 and the $599 PS3. My guess is that they will implement a price cut either A) after they sell through the black Elites, B)when they move to 65nm chips, or C)when the PS3 does. Most likely it will be either A or B and I would place it either immediately before the holidays or sometime next spring. Of course this is all supposition on my part, but I think it would have been foolish, from a business perspective, for Microsoft to cut prices now.

    4. Re:Prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS3 in the US has hardware backwards compatibility. There are obviously some issues but they are pretty much the same to me as the PS2 issues with PS1 games. Mind you Europe and everywhere else besides Japan and the US got shafted with software backwards compatibility (even if they support 75%+ of the older library which is more than the Xbox 360 in initial percentage of old games supported and obviously the number of games).

    5. Re:Prices by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      "What I don't understand is why Microsoft isn't playing a price war yet."

      They're waiting for Sony to blink first.

      Sony drops $100, MS drops $120.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    6. Re:Prices by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Sony's machine costs $800 and putting pressure on them to lower a price point could hasten any future demise... if it's in the cards.

      I seriously doubt it costs Sony $800 to make them. The iSupply estimate that stuck that price tag on the PS3 was done even before it was released, during a blue laser diode drought. So iSupply stuck a $125 price tag on the Blu-Ray drive alone and high prices on other components too. Six months later and blue lasert diodes are not in short supply, and neither are PS3s. Clearly their production issues are sorted and they're even reducing costs in other ways such as the recent move to software BC which chops several chips.

      It really would not surprise me if the PS3 were at breakeven or close to it right now. Once 65nm Cell happens that is another reduction in costs, not just for the processor but also in the heatsinks, weight and possibly even the case size.

      It does seem weird that MS aren't trying to put the boot in right now since they must have more leeway to do it. Shoving out a modestly revamped Elite version seems a peculiar way to compete with Sony when it still misses things like wifi or HD playback which people are starting to take notice of.

  10. Elite looks like a bad deal by maynard · · Score: 1

    I have both a 20GB 360 and a 60GB PS3. When I compare price vs. features between both units, it's now starting to look like the PS3 wins out. Especially if one believes that Blu-Ray is going to win the HD format war. MS has made a pricing mistake, and I think the market will give them a good thrashing as a result.

    1. Re:Elite looks like a bad deal by Babbster · · Score: 1

      There's one significant problem with all the comments that Microsoft is making a mistake with their pricing compared to the PS3: They can drop the prices anytime if they believe it's necessary. If they're currently losing money per console (I haven't seen recent estimates), they're losing far less than Sony is right now, which means they have pricing flexibility. They could drop the whole lineup from $480/400/300 to $400/300/200 and probably still be losing less per console than Sony.

      To my way of thinking, this just means that now is the wrong time to buy either a 360 or PS3, going perhaps with a Wii to hold them over until Q4 - I think it's a given that 360 prices will drop before the end of the year.

    2. Re:Elite looks like a bad deal by maynard · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I mean, which unit to buy (if any) is entirely up to you and your personal finances. Right now the 360 has a dramatic gaming advantage over the PS3, but that should change within a year or so. I bought the PS3 to play Blu-Ray movies. The only game I have for it is Resistance, and compared to Gears of War... well, let's just say I'm more impressed by Gears than by Resistance.

      As for your point on pricing flexibility, that's spot on. Microsoft has cut out an HD optical drive yet prices the unit $20 below the 20GB PS3 with blu-ray. Of course they have more pricing flexibility. And they're also closer to migrating to 65nm (I believe), which should reduce component costs too.

      BTW: If you're happy with that Wii, I'd wait it out too. There will be plenty of fine games on your platform down the road.

    3. Re:Elite looks like a bad deal by Retric · · Score: 1

      Sony might be losing more money per PS3 but they also have more to gain from it. IMO they are more than willing to kill off the PS3 if it wins them the next format war.

      Anyway, PS2 sold 100+million units, lasted for 6 years and is still selling faster than the 360 and ps3 put together. If you assume the 360 will last as long as the Xbox and the PS3 will last as long as the PS2 then your price per year is the same but Sony's loss per unit can be much higher and sill break even.

      PS: It's still a little early to tell but IMO the PS3 is in a much better position. It has better graphics capabilities than the 360, its disk's hold more data and it's still selling reasonably well. Because the PS3 has better base hardware the 360 is going to need to start the next cycle even sooner or play second fiddle for 4+ years.

    4. Re:Elite looks like a bad deal by Babbster · · Score: 1

      PS: It's still a little early to tell but IMO the PS3 is in a much better position. It has better graphics capabilities than the 360, its disk's hold more data and it's still selling reasonably well. Because the PS3 has better base hardware the 360 is going to need to start the next cycle even sooner or play second fiddle for 4+ years.

      All but the disc space argument could have been made for the Xbox over the PS2. It's entirely about the games and PS3 is far, far behind in that area with every chance that games formerly exclusive to Sony's platform(s) will be made multiplatform. Unless something really magical happens by the end of this year, the PS3 may end up in a hole it can't dig its way out of. Sony could win one war (Blu-ray) at the cost of losing another (console gaming).
  11. Repeated disc swapping by tepples · · Score: 1

    The medium the game comes on will not effect the quality of the game. True, they might have to make the game span more than one disk to fit the same amount of content. Swapping discs whenever you cross back and forth over a zone boundary is not fun and reduces the interaction quality of the game even if not the visual quality. What do you suggest to prevent this?
    1. Re:Repeated disc swapping by BeansBaxter · · Score: 1

      You could use the hard drive to cache the content better. Or reduce the game content to less than 9G. Are there actually any multi dvd console games at this point? I understand higher res textures for PS3 / Xbox 360 will impact the size needed but has it even happened where more than one dvd was needed?

    2. Re:Repeated disc swapping by crabbz · · Score: 1

      Easy! The Elite should have included a DVD changer so you can stick all the discs in and let it switch around as needed. That would show those blu-ray goons.

    3. Re:Repeated disc swapping by tepples · · Score: 1

      You could use the hard drive to cache the content better. I thought having to "install" games was what the consoles were specifically intended to get away from.

      Or reduce the game content to less than 9G. Good luck retraining all your artists to work on procedural tools. Good luck covering up the extra CPU-bound loading time that decompressing procedural content will incur without making an experience that looks like "installing".
    4. Re:Repeated disc swapping by KingKiki217 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Star Ocean: Till the End of Time was on two disks (DVD's) on the PS2, and that was years ago.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Ocean:_Till_the_ End_of_Time

  12. My problem with upgrading to the Elite... by CaseM · · Score: 1

    Upgrading to the Elite is problematic for me, even if I were so inclined, because my wife likes to play the XBLA games on her own account and I don't want to rebuy them all. Has Microsoft anticipated this and will they make games fully authorized after I upgrade? I don't want to be forced to connect to XBL and under my account just to play my XBL games. If they want me to consider upgrading then they should plan to offer assistance to people in my situation. I'll warrant there are plenty of people like me out there.

    1. Re:My problem with upgrading to the Elite... by powerlord · · Score: 1

      Yeah ... there are people who already do what you want. ... they're using Sony's PSN, it supports this sort of functionality.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    2. Re:My problem with upgrading to the Elite... by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 1

      Yes MS is providing an migration route, not only for HD content, but Machine ID specific content.

    3. Re:My problem with upgrading to the Elite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think the majority of people who are in the market for a gaming system will go by hard drive size when they make their decision. Or at least, I would hope not...

    4. Re:My problem with upgrading to the Elite... by iainl · · Score: 1

      Even with your current machine, whichever account purchased the games has got that purchase registered against them. If you lost your drive in a hideous malfunction, accidentally deleted the data or whatever other circumstance might cause you to lose it, like just being desperate for space, you can download it all over again without paying a second time, apparently.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  13. It appears to me that..... by Chazmyrr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    someone at Microsoft is smoking crack. They get the edge over Sony and then they step on their crank with this crap.

    The pricing virtually eliminates premium sales. No one is going to pay $400 for the premium w/ 20GB instead of $480 for the elite w/ 120GB when the 120GB drive is sold separately for $200. Now there's actually a choice for the consumer at the $500 price point. Do I buy the 360 with the larger hard drive or buy the 20GB PS3 and have a Blu-Ray player?

    Leave it to Microsoft to make the $600 PS3 look like a good deal. $480 + $100 WiFi + $200 HD-DVD = $780.

    1. Re:It appears to me that..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once you add in four controllers and a jewel-encrusted gold chalice, the price advantage completely disappears!

    2. Re:It appears to me that..... by linux_geek_germany · · Score: 0

      they are just extracting the maximum money from the customers that are willing to pay (cf. Apple) and will lower the prices afterwards to meet the mass market.

    3. Re:It appears to me that..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People please stop feeding these trolls. If someone pops up in a an iPod post and start talking about how there Zune has wi-fi and FM radio. Then started doing a price list of how much better value it is on features that people may or may not want... you'd mod them down as a troll.

  14. its a SKU ... by Programmer_In_Traini · · Score: 1

    ...just not a common term for it.

    http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+sku& btnG=Google+Search&meta=

    and if you look in the results ...

    A uniquely identifiable line within a product range. A particular product may have many different variation s eg 20 percent extra free, price marked etc. each of these variation would be a unique SKU.
    www.applause.hu/terms_e.htm

    but i will agree that SKU is generally used to refer to the code of the product, not the product itself.

    --
    If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
    1. Re:its a SKU ... by badasscat · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...just not a common term for it.

      SKU stands for "stock keeping unit". It has an actual meaning and proper use, but it's always struck me as ludicrous to use it outside of a store stockroom.

      When I was in high school (and this was 20 years ago now), I worked as a stockboy in an electronics store. We used "SKU" the way it was intended, just as stockboys probably still do now. Every product has a "SKU number" used like a UPC code to track stock counts, and that eventually got shorthanded to refer to the product itself. (Note that I'm not contradicting you, just adding a little more info.)

      It's always annoyed me when I see this in regular life, just like I see games now referred to as "IP's". In most cases, it's a vain attempt at looking "hip", as if you're cool enough to throw around industry-speak. Usually, though, the true origins of such terms come from marketdroids, lawyers, or worse.

      There's no reason even for an analyst to use the term "SKU". They're not tracking stock. It actually would make somewhat more sense to use UPC as a generic term meaning "product model". I think terms like this are always annoying, though, and would much prefer it if everybody could just settle on plain English outside of their work environment. Why do all of our casual conversations have to include so much meaningless industry jargon?

      "Model" is a perfectly fine word to use. #7 definition at dictionary.com: "a style or design of a particular product". There's no reason to repurpose industry acronyms when we have perfectly meaningful English words already. Unless you REALLY don't have time to utter that extra syllable.

    2. Re:its a SKU ... by dctoastman · · Score: 1

      I think in this context it could be warranted because they are saying that the new Elite package will sit on the shelves alongside the Core and Premium with an entirely new UPC/SKU rather than replacing the Premium or Core.

  15. Does it really matter? by FrozenFOXX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that most people are missing the point. For the general population who's interested in obtaining a game system who cares? The comparing value versus price between PS3 and 360 is only valid if you're looking at doing everything BUT gaming.

    I mean really, you can tell me for instance that the PS3 will do everything from clean my laundry to wash my car but at the end of the day it doesn't have my Gears of War. It doesn't have my Crackdown. There's no Forza Motorsport. There's no XBLA. To top it off it's also a lot cheaper for me to get to play a large library (and ever-growing...just check out upcoming releases like The Darkness, Bioshock, and others) of great games that look spectacular with a superb online system. Can I play Blu-Ray movies? No, but then, did I really want to buy a game system to play movies?

    It's part of the same reason the Wii is selling. It's cheap, it plays good games, and nobody gives a fuck if it can't wipe your butt for you, too. So what does this new 360 do? Who does it cater to? People that feel they have to have the "extra shiny" version of a console to feel superior to other people. The other people are those interested in the Marketplace for downloading things which means there isn't a value comparison with the PS3 since the PS3 doesn't have access to the Marketplace...the very source of content the interested users wanted in the first place. The rest of us just get the Premium and rock on because it lets us play our games which is what WE wanted in the first place.

    There will be a true features/price comparison between the 360 and PS3 when the PS3 has a large library of awesome games (and for the cross-platform ones like DMC4, VF5, and others it's going to need to be worth coughing up several hundred dollars for a better experience or we're still going to get them on the cheaper system that gives the same or better experience) that make it worthwhile to have for playing games.

    Anyone seriously interested in a media server has probably already gotten an Apple product or some other personal computer solution since they tend to be better at it overall. This is all for show and to cater to an elitist (though not necessarily "elite") portion of the interested 360 population, not to the rest of us who buy game systems for playing games.

    --
    "Just a fox, a whisper."
    1. Re:Does it really matter? by Southphillyman · · Score: 1

      This rant might actually mean something is M$ entire strategy wasn't to become an all encompassing media experience.

    2. Re:Does it really matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but you have to pay $50 a year for online access. Of course you fail to mention that. You also forget to mention that PS3 have their own games. Also, some people want an all-in-one device.

      You are brainwashed by Microsoft's viral campaign.

    3. Re:Does it really matter? by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      I mean really, you can tell me for instance that the PS3 will do everything from clean my laundry to wash my car but at the end of the day it doesn't have my Gears of War. It doesn't have my Crackdown. There's no Forza Motorsport. There's no XBLA. To top it off it's also a lot cheaper for me to get to play a large library (and ever-growing...just check out upcoming releases like The Darkness, Bioshock, and others) of great games that look spectacular with a superb online system. Can I play Blu-Ray movies? No, but then, did I really want to buy a game system to play movies? I mean really, you can tell me for instance that the XBox 360 is the end-all be-all of consoles but at the end of the day it doesn't have my Resistance. It doesn't have my Motorstorm. There's no flOw. There's no PS3 store. To top it off there's also a huge library of amazing and amazingly cheap PS2 games that I can play. Can I play Blu-Ray moves? Yes, and they look amazing and are a great added bonus.

      Listen, I like my 360 (Worms + Viva Pinata = awesome), but your arguments make no sense.
    4. Re:Does it really matter? by iainl · · Score: 1

      I think the GP's arguments make perfect sense. Both companies can add all the bells and whistles they want for value-added stuff. But at the end of the day, they're game consoles, and if you want to play Motorstorm you buy a PS3, and if you want to play Crackdown you buy a 360.

      I bought a PS2 because I really wanted to play GTAIII (at that point there was no sign of it going multiplatform). I bought an XBox because I really wanted to play Orta. Cube for Monkey Ball, 360 for Dead Rising. And so on. When there's a PS3 WipEout I'll probably fold on that, too.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    5. Re:Does it really matter? by FrozenFOXX · · Score: 1

      What makes no sense? The 360 has titles the PS3 does not. The PS3 has titles the 360 does not. THERE IS NO COMPARISON. People can talk about the 360's HD-DVD drive and Marketplace or the PS3's Home and Blu-Ray but it doesn't amount to a hill of beans if it doesn't have your games.

      Just because I didn't spend extra time to an already-long post to list down from the PS3 side doesn't mean it can't be applied either way, I trust in the reader to figure that part out for themselves.

      --
      "Just a fox, a whisper."
  16. Why not a dual drive by metarox · · Score: 1

    Hell, I'd release one with a dual drive able to read both formats and be done with it!

  17. So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I really want to know and can't find info anywhere:

    - Are there any significant revisions to the internal hardware that would make the machine itself more efficient?
    - Does it run cooler?
    - Is it more quiet?

    There was an article 2 weeks back that went over the component reduction of the 3 Playstation consoles as time went on. Just curious if the Xbox 360 Elite received something similar from its manufacturer.

  18. Here's my take on the reasoning for it by Xest · · Score: 2, Interesting

    MS wants to get the new iteration of their 360 hardware out the door that is, the cooler, quieter and cheaper to produce iteration.

    Whilst cheaper to produce however, MS will still initially make a loss until they're shipping en-masse. Therefore, I'd say MS is releasing the elite with the new hardware iteration as a method to ship said new hardware without taking as high a monetary loss. Essentially, what this means is that they're using the elite as a tool to bring down cost of production of the new hardware iteration, so that 6months down the line, they can start building the premium version with the new hardware so cheap that they can announce a massive price drop on the core and premium.

    Whilst the Elite may indeed look like an idiotic short term decision, if this is their plan then by the end of the year you could see MS shifting the 360 perhaps even as cheap as the Wii is currently. This is something Sony wont be able to compete with any time soon, they've already shafted backwards compatibility in the name of reducing production costs for the European release of the PS3, by xmas 2007 year I'd be suprised if the PS3 had dropped at all, but again, I bet the 360 is selling for current Wii prices. As an aside, I'd guess the Wii will be cheaper again by then, Nintendo is shifting so many units and never made a loss per-unit in the first place so a price cut would be an easy hit for them by xmas 2007.

    I don't know US prices off by heart, but my prediction for xmas 2007 console prices in the UK is something like:
    Wii - £149.99
    360 Core - £169.99 (or possibly even written off altogether)
    360 Premium - £199.99
    PS3 60gb - £399.99

    1. Re:Here's my take on the reasoning for it by Southphillyman · · Score: 0

      Uh the Elite is neither quieter or cooler. This has been covered already. Please research before you waste time writing 3 paragraph responses.

    2. Re:Here's my take on the reasoning for it by valathax · · Score: 1
      Actually it isn't known yet if there have been any process changes in the elite edition. While an MS marketing rep has made comments about the inclusion of a process shrink the wording used was vague and non-definative.

      http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/xbox -360-elite-interview-with-microsofts-albert-penell o-247635.php

  19. CAn we stop having posts by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    like this one that presumes everyone already knows what its about just because its apparently a microsoft product?
    Its just like presuming that all computer software runs under MS windows.
    I have no clue what an elite is even after reading the post.

  20. Re:Repeated disc swapping= Advantage 360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you use your PS3 to play games and to play movies, you are going to find yourself swapping disc a lot more than a 360 which to date has only ONE FMV heavy game where you have to swap discs once every several hours. With the HD-DVD add-on (or a standalone player), I can keep my favorite game in the box and ready to go at a moments notice and don't have to swap everytime I want to watch a movie (which may take more than one sitting for a feature filled disc). So with the 360 setup, you swap LESS and you don't wear out the most fragile (and expensive in the case of the PS3) part of your game console- the optical drive mechanism. Thank you for pointing out the superiority of the options that Microsoft gives you and the inferiority and inflexibility that Sony forces on the user (who probably doesn't even own an HD set).

  21. 360 games will be better than PS3 for 2yrs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (1) They both have 512MB, but the OS on the PS3 permanently takes a much bigger slice of that, something like 128MB?? vs 32MB used permanently by the OS on the 360.
    (2) The 360 has symmetric multiprocessors--3 dual-core PPC chips that use the same memory heirarchy, caches etc. That's 6 in-order execution pipes. Compare that to the PS3 which has *one* general processor pipe and *7* (not 8) SPUs which are basically DSPs. One of those SPUs is permanently reserved to the OS so you only get to use 6 of them. The SPUs have a stupendously tiny amount of RAM each (128 KB or something?) so you have to shuffle data back and forth from the main RAM with DMA in order to get anything done. That transfer can be fast but its still often a bottleneck.
    (3) The 360 is pretty flexible about letting you use any of your 480MB as graphics memory or for non-graphics stuff. The PS3 requires a fixed division. This combined with the OS memory usage means that when porting 360 games to the PS3, we usually divide all our texture sizes by 2.
    (4) The 360 has 48 unified pixel/vertex pipes. If you game heavily uses vertex shaders, more of the pipes will be doing vertexes at any one time, and if it heavily uses pixel shaders, more of them will be doing that--but you can easily get near-100% utilization of the hardware. The PS3 has classic dedicated pipes (I don't know how many) so you still have to balance that usage like you have to on PC video cards.
    (5) The Microsoft devkits are not perfect, but they are really good -- much better than Nintendo's and 1000x better than Sony's.

    The combination of these things means the Xbox360 is MUCH easier to program for, MUCH easier to port existing console or PC graphics engines to, and in general easier for developers to extract the power from.

    I predict it will be at least 2 years before we see PS3 games that rival the best Xbox360 games in graphical quality and performance.

    1. Re:360 games will be better than PS3 for 2yrs by DrXym · · Score: 2, Interesting
      (2) The 360 has symmetric multiprocessors--3 dual-core PPC chips that use the same memory heirarchy, caches etc. That's 6 in-order execution pipes. Compare that to the PS3 which has *one* general processor pipe and *7* (not 8) SPUs which are

      Correction, the 360 has 3 multi-threaded cores (think hyperthreading), and the Cell has 1 multi-threaded core plus 7 SPUs. That means the optimal arrangement for the PS3 is to have one general execution thread and perhaps another thread responsible for farming out work to the SPUs. The 360's optimal arrangement is to have 6 threads running at once.

      Either way the programming challenges are pretty similar - feeding all the threads / SPUs with data and collecting the results. Ultimately the differences are interesting but not really that important compared to the number crunching that a typical game requires. Any game which is heavy with shading, transformations or physics will perform better if written for the Cell than it will for the Xenon processor, simply because SPUs are basically number shovels.

      The combination of these things means the Xbox360 is MUCH easier to program for, MUCH easier to port existing console or PC graphics engines to, and in general easier for developers to extract the power from.

      I suspect that DirectX has more to do with the ease of porting PC titles than anything else with the devkit. But as most games sensibly choose to abstract their rendering behind an API (e.g. Renderware, Unreal or proprietary in-house engines), I doubt it makes as much difference as Microsoft would wish. More important to good performance is ensuring that these middleware APIs are properly optimized for the platforms they run on. An example of that might be the PhysX engine which claimed 10x speed improvements in some areas when they released 4.5 which was SPU optimized.

    2. Re:360 games will be better than PS3 for 2yrs by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Correction, Havok 4.5 engine, not PhysX.

    3. Re:360 games will be better than PS3 for 2yrs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      (1) They both have 512MB, but the OS on the PS3 permanently takes a much bigger slice of that, something like 128MB?? vs 32MB used permanently by the OS on the 360.

      It's 64MB main memory, 32MB vram. Yeah, kinda sucks. Funny thing is, the 360 only had 256 until they found out that the PS3 was going to have 512, so quickly matched that. Unfortunately, the chipset doesn't support anything larger than that, so all of the devkits are stuck with 512 as well. All of the devkits of the prior generation and all except for the 360 in this generation have a lot of extra memory for use in debugging - something which many developers have come to rely on.


      (2) The 360 has symmetric multiprocessors--3 dual-core PPC chips that use the same memory heirarchy, caches etc. That's 6 in-order execution pipes. Compare that to the PS3 which has *one* general processor pipe and *7* (not 8) SPUs which are basically DSPs. One of those SPUs is permanently reserved to the OS so you only get to use 6 of them. The SPUs have a stupendously tiny amount of RAM each (128 KB or something?) so you have to shuffle data back and forth from the main RAM with DMA in order to get anything done. That transfer can be fast but its still often a bottleneck.

      Like the other poster said, it's not 3 dual-cores, it's 3 hyperthreaded cores. And the PS3 core is hyperthreaded as well. Unfortunately, with the miserable caching architecture both of these platforms were designed with, the capacity of any given core is closer to 1 than to 2 due to cache contention between threads (especially the instruction cache). I've found that running two concurrent worker threads on a single core is barely faster than running them in sequence on a single thread.

      (Oh, and it's 256K of memory on the SPUs. This is effectively all L1 cache, but you have to manage it manually. Still, it's a dream compared to the 16K of memory on VU1 on the PS2).


      (3) The 360 is pretty flexible about letting you use any of your 480MB as graphics memory or for non-graphics stuff. The PS3 requires a fixed division. This combined with the OS memory usage means that when porting 360 games to the PS3, we usually divide all our texture sizes by 2.

      The GPU on the PS3 can load textures and geometry from main memory, at nearly the same bandwidth as from vram. In fact, it's on a separate bus, so it's actually beneficial to keep some assets in main memory. Since the bulk of your memory is going to be used for textures, geometry, and display buffers, you're not likely to exceed the 192MB of main memory with stuff that can only go in main memory. Of course, the overall size is still less, so you would naturally have to reduce texture sizes for a naive port from the 360 (we had to do this for PS2->gamecube ports a lot). The SPUs do let you perform some tricks to mitigate this, though. For instance, keeping vertex streams compressed in memory and decompressed on-the-fly during render.

      Oh, and another advantage of the PS3 is that you can render directly to vram, without having to perform a separate resolve from 10MB-render-target-only edram. If you want to do 720p with anti-aliasing or anything higher on the 360, you have to use tiled-rendering, which can easily consume many megs of main memory for the display-list cache.


      (4) The 360 has 48 unified pixel/vertex pipes. If you game heavily uses vertex shaders, more of the pipes will be doing vertexes at any one time, and if it heavily uses pixel shaders, more of them will be doing that--but you can easily get near-100% utilization of the hardware. The PS3 has classic dedicated pipes (I don't know how many) so you still have to balance that usage like you have to on PC video cards.

      I can't recall exactly, but I think it's 8/40, vertex and pixel pipes. The PS3 is really using a last-gen GPU, and I consider that to be it's Achilles' Heel in terms of performance. Probably had something to do with them slapping on the GPU at the last moment when they figured o

    4. Re:360 games will be better than PS3 for 2yrs by mgblst · · Score: 1

      The only people who can make a more bloated OS than Microsoft is Sony.

      After using some Sony software before, I can really believe it.

  22. You sound like a typical AC troll by yoyhed · · Score: 1

    You sound like you come from a typical shitty pc developer like Bethesda.
    Yes, because Bethesda is totally known for making shitty games.
    --
    WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
  23. Re:Repeated disc swapping= Advantage 360 by tepples · · Score: 1

    With the HD-DVD add-on (or a standalone player), I can keep my favorite game in the box and ready to go at a moments notice and don't have to swap everytime I want to watch a movie (which may take more than one sitting for a feature filled disc). Are there any Xbox 360 games that have the potential to be The Only Game I Play in the same manner as World of Warcraft for PCs? If you are playing Gears of War and you want to check up on your Piñata Crossing garden, you still have to swap game discs.
  24. why wonder,why fight ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    make-it custom, leave consumer choice between HD-DVD or Blu-Ray thing is, how the games will come on support ? in the end i think consumer is the one who's gonna lose, blue-ray is already shipped on ps3, but blu-ray disk are more expensive to produce, hd-dvd's are cheaper to make, but lesser pieces over to play them, so tough choice there...

    anyway hdmi port + 120 hdd does not imply 160 dollar expenses MS should at least improvise some wifi over that

    well, anyway i don't play so much around, good think there is a choice of products but i still miss those 25 dollar games from back in the days...

  25. I Honestly Can't Believe your CRAP!!! by Maximegalon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I have no interest in either format that offers little value over DVD, and has less restrictions. I want to PLAY GAMES and view media off my PC about (300 gig). So let's do the REAL math. $600 PS3 $310 PS3 notebook drive to match/hold my existing desktop PC media (and I have to reencode and copy/duplicate the media) $40 HDMI cable to match resolution of the given cable of 360 $0 For the great PS3 "online service" for the few online games the PS3 has $400 Premium 360 $40 WAP and wired router, lets me put 4 devices on a wireless network easily $200 For XBOX Live for 5 years when bought in yearly amounts (just shop a little) $10 USB multi-reader card to match PS3's Hmmm, I have $300 extra to burn. Perhaps for that HDDVD drive and a couple of movies. Also, the 360 has infinitely better online support and a lot better games (more games in 1080p, more online games, more exclusives i.e. dead rising, lost planet, gears of war, Halo 3, Lumines, viva pinata, star trek legacy, chromehounds) Oh, I could even write my own game for the 360 if I wanted too. Face it, the PS3 sucks for anything other than a BlueRay player, an expensive UNIX box or running folding @home.

    1. Re:I Honestly Can't Believe your CRAP!!! by theorangesven · · Score: 1

      Woah, wait. How is Lumines an exclusive, when there are 3 versions on Sony systems. Also, Lumines on 360 is the worst version, in that at higher levels, it pulls a tetris by upping the speed too much, turning it into a twitch game instead of a thinking game. And that dpad? Euw.

  26. I second that by ari_j · · Score: 1

    This one was pretty pathetic. The first mention of the actual product's name that the story is about is in the 12th of 13 lines in the blurb. I read all the way to the end before I knew what the title or article was even about, and I still don't know what it all means. Of course, Zonk apparently knows plenty about this, as he put up two articles on the subject today. Maybe an update to the previous article or a new article that didn't show up on the front page was in order instead of a brand-new, totally incomprehensible one right there, up front.

    Also, as to those people saying that "sku" == "product," you're wrong. SKU stands for stock keeping unit, and according to Wikipedia they are assigned at the merchant level. Use real words when you are writing journalism, if not solely for the sake of appearing to be fluent in the language you are being paid to write in.

  27. We should by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 1

    It took me a couple of reads of the first paragraph and then seeing the topic, that this was probably MS' XBOX 360.

    I thought that "Elite" referred to the classic computer game. Silly me.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  28. It isn't by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    The game Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, a SOE MMORPG, packs in at a whopping 17gb installed. 2 DVD's plus the inevitable patches and updates that need to be downloaded.

    While you can rant and rave about the merits of Vanguard it shows that a single dvd just isn't enough anymore.

    And that game, unlike Everquest 2 doesn't even have tons of speech in it.

    Neither does it have any pre-rendered movies. That 17gig of data is just maps, textures, music and sounds.

    I remember that one of the first CD games, 7th guest game in fact on multiple cd's.

    And no, that wasn't very user friendly. People HATE to swap discs. The alternative is a lengthy install procedure were everything is transferred from the install discs to the HD. A limited space HD (a pitifull 20gb for the core 360) that you probably don't want to clutter with the intro movie that could just as well play from the play disc.

    Frankly, kid, welcome to 2007. Every single time a new storage medium makes its introduction someone claims that the old ways are still good enough. Well I got news for you, 640kb is NOT enough for everyone. Technology moves on.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:It isn't by BeansBaxter · · Score: 1

      My comments weren't directed at the technical merits of more storage. Obviously there are places where more data is important. I'm just commenting on the console market. I guess it doesn't make sense to me to develop an MMO like you describe for a console market. Sure there will always be a place for more room. And multiple disk games will happen. But having a handful of games that require the extra space may not make the best business case for a significant increase in the cost of the console. Also we have yet to see if the 60-100 dollar game will actually sell well enough to merit that kind of investment in development into the future. Content costs money to produce. I know tools are continuing to be written and used that make it easier. I was just wondering out loud how many developers are going to produce those kinds of games for the console market to require 20+ gig of storage on a disk.

  29. HD DVD still alive by Rdickinson · · Score: 1

    They just cant include it because no drive does 12 speed DVD and therefore doesnt meet the spec for 360 games.

    MS can easily supply a BR drive too, but believe that HD DVD is better for the consumer, ultimatly it'll be digital online delivery anyhow and media will become a thing of the past.

    Saying that I dont see the Elite offering good value for money unless your desprate for HDMI & love HDCP.

  30. What the fuck is with the article altogether? by caitsith01 · · Score: 1, Redundant
    Like one or two of the readers of this site, I'm not an X-box fanboy, and I had NFI what this article was about from the headline or first line of the summary:

    Elite Won't Replace Premium or Core Skus

    and

    As the day has progressed, more information about the 'Elite' has become available.

    Assumptions:

    - everyone knows what a "sku" is (an open-source implementation of a ski? a pygmy skunk?)

    - everyone knows that the word "Elite" refers only to a particular version of a particular game console released by Microsoft

    - everyone knows that Microsoft's other current marketing cliches for its X-Box 360 console are "Premium" and "Core"

    - everyone is sitting with baited breath with all the details of what is going on, just waiting for this vital piece of information ("As the day has progressed...")

    Zonk, you've done it again. Acronyms, lack of context, assumed knowledge. Slashdot: news for people who already know what we're reporting about.
    --
    Read Pynchon.
    1. Re:What the fuck is with the article altogether? by SuperMonkeyCube · · Score: 1
      Perhaps it's Amerocentric. Home Depot, Office Depot, Target, Wal-Mart all seem to have SKU numbers all over the store shelves and assume that the customers have some sort of familiarity with the idea. Anyone over 50 trying to redeem coupons in one of those stores has had to fight with the employees over exactly which SKU is on sale, and why don't they have any, and so on.


      Since the stores often would rather use an identifying number shorter than the EAN (which used to be the UPC) the SKU - usually 5-7 digits - is used.

      However, that would not seem to excuse the headline - since that last word s/b SKUs and not Skus IMO. Since the ambiguous headline was under the Game section, it would tend to narrow your mental choices down. Perhaps it would read better as

      M$ XBox360 'Elite' is not replacing 'Premium' or 'Core' SKU's

      and now it's gotten too long and isn't really a headline anymore. Zonk, I'm not ready to take your job. Assume away.

  31. Re: Why use MPEG or even VC-1 Cutscenes? by trdrstv · · Score: 1
    It also means that you're going to chew up more disc space for each level. With streamed textures, streamed geometry and streamed audio, even with compression, you can quickly approach 1 GB of data per level. That inherently limits you to a maximum of about 7 levels, and that's without multiplayer levels or mpeg cutscenes.

    Ok, quick question. Why have ANY mpeg cutscenes? I understood the need back in the day when FinalFantasy VII had primitive graphics but GORGEOUS cutscenes, but now? RE4 (on Gamecube anyway) did all the cutscenes in game, and it was fantastic. Gears of War looks like it was all ingame engine (I don't know for sure though).

    Why at this point don't they use the in-game engine? The graphics are nice enough and it keeps you immersed.