2.0 is in the box, on the demo disc that comes with it. For some curious reason (probably just that 2.0 was finished too late for manufacture) they shipped with 1.52 in the firmware itself, then ask you to upgrade it.
If 1.52 turns out to be easier to exploit in order to get homebrew code running, this is going to actually be a good thing.
Just as long as we get the corollary to that 'right' (which we do have in the market-leading games store in the UK):
(0a) When I buy a game at full price, it will be a new, factory sealed copy, not one that has previously been returned covered in scratches and fingerprints, along with tears in the manual.
I'm quite happy losing right 0 in order to get 0a, as I do enough research to avoid most horribly poor games.
"Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda will do more than bust your knee caps. They'll fly a plane into your skyscraper."
Which is all well and good if it weren't for the fact that Al Qaeda clearly want to to the latter anyway. Unless you're seriously suggesting that Bin Laden is likely to release a statement in the near future saying
"As the US Government has been letting us off for all these pirated copies of 40 Year Old Virgin, we've decided to cease all terrorist activity, as it's just unnecessary now"
You're not the only person, either in this story or generally, to comment on how awful going to the movies is these days in the US.
It really, really isn't anywhere near as bad in the UK most of the time, honest. The one time that I've recently had teenagers nattering during a film (Batman Begins) they were kicked out the doors after 10 minutes anyway.
Actually, I really, really hate the under and over rated mods. They don't get metamodded, so people feel free to use them like idiots, and it's perfectly common to post an on-topic comment that isn't exactly inane, and yet still get some twat mark it 'overrated' without any other modding on it at all, not even the Karma Bonus.
Still, those cinemas, eh? Obsolete. Unless your HT's screen is under 20ft high and you're not capable of cranking it to reference without annoying everyone in a 2-block radius.
I'd suggest a different solution: Make Films Not Suck.
The reason why you'll probably not want to see "40 Year Old Virgin" in 4 months time (and dear God is that a short wait compared to back when films actually made money) is because it's mindless average twaddle.
If it actually _isn't_ twaddle (I wouldn't know; it holds no appeal) then the positive buzz from the cinema release might mean you do want to see it when you can.
One of the biggest problems I see with the Cinema releases recently is that you no longer _have_ to go if you want to see the big movie soon. The Studios have been so eager to minimise piracy that you've only got 4 months to wait for the average DVD release.
4 whole months. Woo.
Couple this with the fact that there are so many films coming out that, even ignoring the obvious junk, I'm constantly behind with the films I want to see that I've got a massive list of unseen stuff, you've got to have something pretty bloody spectacular to get me to make the hassle of babysitter-finding, ticket-booking and a 30+ minute drive to the cinema.
Fundamentally, though, they really, really ought to look at their numbers. Name me a multinational corporation in anything other than the entertainment industry that hasn't tried to improve profits over the last decade by cutting costs. Now look at how much making an average summer movie has gone up by over the same time.
Want to make more money? Stop handing wheelbarrow-loads of cash to 7 executive producers to sit around a table and attempt to micromanage the plot to death, before paying 10M+ to mid-range talent who don't actually do anything to get bums on seats on opening weekend.
There might be licensing problems, but on a purely technical basis the only challenge is lasers that read both formats. Every hardware decoder designer I know is working chips that will decodes both bitstreams, if nothing else because it means one chip to fab, not two.
Both formats support the same video and audio codecs anyway; the only differences are menu code and the physical disc structure.
Irrespective of how powerful it is, I've got the basic issue that my PC won't play PGR3. But then, an X360 won't play Battlefield 2 or GT-R, so I'm stuffed with just either one machine.
Frankly, yes I would trust the word of a random blog I've never heard of before over that of Sky News. At least I'm not aware of any history of random blog broadcasting any old random shite in an attempt to be first with "NEWS", irrespective of the veracity of those claims.
The GPU in the final machine should be able to do most of the decoding work for the HD-DVD codecs (which are identical to the BluRay ones) in hardware, so that shouldn't be too much of an issue, at least.
I know what you mean about the fact that games are supposed to work without the drive; I was gutted when I found that out. Still, you're allowed to use it if you want, and we don't know how big the memory cards are going to be - it's entirely possible that save files of tens of megs are still ok; I've not heard from anyone about that.
Finally, Itagaki may make brilliant games, but he's a grade A twat when it comes to shooting his mouth off in the press. Frankly, the only reason 9Gb isn't enough for him is that he wants more space for poorly compressed cutscenes; I'm actually kind of glad he can't have them.
1) Any eventual option to have an HD-DVD drive (and it's only a 'possiblity', along with BluRay and a dual-format drive right now) will be for watching films; no games will come out on the format. This is entirely because the machine is powerful enough to play back HD movies without framedropping, so when the price is right they'll sell the option to do so.
2) The HD will eventually become 'optional' as in they'll reduce the apparent price of the 360 at some point by launching a budget version with the drive removed and sell it you seperately. You'll need the drive if you want additional Live-based content or backward compatibility. No HD-less version at launch, however.
If you want the box to play X360 games on, there's nothing wrong with the launch units. All this is about is providing the market with a number of options at a later date.
There's no point in bundling an HD-DVD drive right now because they cost a fortune and there's nothing to watch on them. Microsoft are taking the very sensible stance of not putting the price of the machine up by a couple of hundred dollars just so early-adopter film buffs can have a format that may well be dead as a doornail in two years.
On the other hand, can you name a title that a current $200 graphics card fails to run? I know I can't. It's only recently (i.e. the release of Battlefield 2) that I've found something that my GeForce 4 won't play.
Umm, if you don't know what an ethernet port is, then your player is going to be dead in short order when you fail to connect it to the Internet in that case...
OK, I'll be clearer. The X360 _really_ needs one because the kits the developers are hard at work on document that there is a caching partition available for their use. If they suddenly change their mind at this point in the game and remove it, then everyone's launch titles are going to turn up several months late.
A hard drive is needed for the same reason the XBox needed one. Games are allowed to use a fair bit of the space for temporary caching, swap space and the like. Your XBox Live profile goes on there (and Microsoft have made a big thing about how much detail will be stored over and above last time). Anything you download from XBox Live Arcade (which you will be able to access even on the free Silver level subscription) needs to be stored as well.
Apart from anything, Backward compatibility demands a 750Mb swap partition just for XBox 1 software.
And you think that we won't check for an ethernet port on the back just in case before handing our money over?
They're not doing Internet connections, because it'll kill the portable player market stone dead, and that's a pretty big one to write off in the quest for ever more insane levels of DRM.
I've seen no evidence for 2 SKUs, and certainly nothing to indicate that Microsoft would release a version without a hard drive, when you need one to run games at all.
His entire argument appears to be based on "the hardware is expensive, so Microsoft is going to have to sell it at $399". Did he not notice how it is no more expensive than the XBox they launched last time at $299?
Slashdot Mirror
2.0 is in the box, on the demo disc that comes with it. For some curious reason (probably just that 2.0 was finished too late for manufacture) they shipped with 1.52 in the firmware itself, then ask you to upgrade it.
If 1.52 turns out to be easier to exploit in order to get homebrew code running, this is going to actually be a good thing.
Just as long as we get the corollary to that 'right' (which we do have in the market-leading games store in the UK):
(0a) When I buy a game at full price, it will be a new, factory sealed copy, not one that has previously been returned covered in scratches and fingerprints, along with tears in the manual.
I'm quite happy losing right 0 in order to get 0a, as I do enough research to avoid most horribly poor games.
"Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda will do more than bust your knee caps. They'll fly a plane into your skyscraper."
Which is all well and good if it weren't for the fact that Al Qaeda clearly want to to the latter anyway. Unless you're seriously suggesting that Bin Laden is likely to release a statement in the near future saying
"As the US Government has been letting us off for all these pirated copies of 40 Year Old Virgin, we've decided to cease all terrorist activity, as it's just unnecessary now"
I certainly can't find any flaw in your logic if you delete the copy after you've watched it, that's for sure.
Absolutely. Have you heard the roughly an episode's worth of original music Chris Franke completed for it? It's just marvellous.
You're not the only person, either in this story or generally, to comment on how awful going to the movies is these days in the US.
It really, really isn't anywhere near as bad in the UK most of the time, honest. The one time that I've recently had teenagers nattering during a film (Batman Begins) they were kicked out the doors after 10 minutes anyway.
Actually, I really, really hate the under and over rated mods. They don't get metamodded, so people feel free to use them like idiots, and it's perfectly common to post an on-topic comment that isn't exactly inane, and yet still get some twat mark it 'overrated' without any other modding on it at all, not even the Karma Bonus.
Still, those cinemas, eh? Obsolete. Unless your HT's screen is under 20ft high and you're not capable of cranking it to reference without annoying everyone in a 2-block radius.
I'd suggest a different solution: Make Films Not Suck.
The reason why you'll probably not want to see "40 Year Old Virgin" in 4 months time (and dear God is that a short wait compared to back when films actually made money) is because it's mindless average twaddle.
If it actually _isn't_ twaddle (I wouldn't know; it holds no appeal) then the positive buzz from the cinema release might mean you do want to see it when you can.
One of the biggest problems I see with the Cinema releases recently is that you no longer _have_ to go if you want to see the big movie soon. The Studios have been so eager to minimise piracy that you've only got 4 months to wait for the average DVD release.
4 whole months. Woo.
Couple this with the fact that there are so many films coming out that, even ignoring the obvious junk, I'm constantly behind with the films I want to see that I've got a massive list of unseen stuff, you've got to have something pretty bloody spectacular to get me to make the hassle of babysitter-finding, ticket-booking and a 30+ minute drive to the cinema.
Fundamentally, though, they really, really ought to look at their numbers. Name me a multinational corporation in anything other than the entertainment industry that hasn't tried to improve profits over the last decade by cutting costs. Now look at how much making an average summer movie has gone up by over the same time.
Want to make more money? Stop handing wheelbarrow-loads of cash to 7 executive producers to sit around a table and attempt to micromanage the plot to death, before paying 10M+ to mid-range talent who don't actually do anything to get bums on seats on opening weekend.
There might be licensing problems, but on a purely technical basis the only challenge is lasers that read both formats. Every hardware decoder designer I know is working chips that will decodes both bitstreams, if nothing else because it means one chip to fab, not two.
Both formats support the same video and audio codecs anyway; the only differences are menu code and the physical disc structure.
Hit 'Parent'. The X360 weenie was just taking the piss out of a PS3 weenie by replacing 'Microsoft' with 'Sony'.
Somehow, something about the X360 launch was a Very Bad Thing according the the parent, but they didn't state quite what or why.
Why should the NFL care if EA fail to sell lots of copies? They get their millions of dollars either way.
Irrespective of how powerful it is, I've got the basic issue that my PC won't play PGR3. But then, an X360 won't play Battlefield 2 or GT-R, so I'm stuffed with just either one machine.
Minor point of fact: The XBox 360 is a touch smaller than the PS3.
"Does anybody understand patent system?"
Not Sky Fucking News, that's for sure.
Frankly, yes I would trust the word of a random blog I've never heard of before over that of Sky News. At least I'm not aware of any history of random blog broadcasting any old random shite in an attempt to be first with "NEWS", irrespective of the veracity of those claims.
The GPU in the final machine should be able to do most of the decoding work for the HD-DVD codecs (which are identical to the BluRay ones) in hardware, so that shouldn't be too much of an issue, at least.
I know what you mean about the fact that games are supposed to work without the drive; I was gutted when I found that out. Still, you're allowed to use it if you want, and we don't know how big the memory cards are going to be - it's entirely possible that save files of tens of megs are still ok; I've not heard from anyone about that.
Finally, Itagaki may make brilliant games, but he's a grade A twat when it comes to shooting his mouth off in the press. Frankly, the only reason 9Gb isn't enough for him is that he wants more space for poorly compressed cutscenes; I'm actually kind of glad he can't have them.
1) Any eventual option to have an HD-DVD drive (and it's only a 'possiblity', along with BluRay and a dual-format drive right now) will be for watching films; no games will come out on the format. This is entirely because the machine is powerful enough to play back HD movies without framedropping, so when the price is right they'll sell the option to do so.
2) The HD will eventually become 'optional' as in they'll reduce the apparent price of the 360 at some point by launching a budget version with the drive removed and sell it you seperately. You'll need the drive if you want additional Live-based content or backward compatibility. No HD-less version at launch, however.
If you want the box to play X360 games on, there's nothing wrong with the launch units. All this is about is providing the market with a number of options at a later date.
There's no point in bundling an HD-DVD drive right now because they cost a fortune and there's nothing to watch on them. Microsoft are taking the very sensible stance of not putting the price of the machine up by a couple of hundred dollars just so early-adopter film buffs can have a format that may well be dead as a doornail in two years.
On the other hand, can you name a title that a current $200 graphics card fails to run? I know I can't. It's only recently (i.e. the release of Battlefield 2) that I've found something that my GeForce 4 won't play.
Umm, if you don't know what an ethernet port is, then your player is going to be dead in short order when you fail to connect it to the Internet in that case...
OK, I'll be clearer. The X360 _really_ needs one because the kits the developers are hard at work on document that there is a caching partition available for their use. If they suddenly change their mind at this point in the game and remove it, then everyone's launch titles are going to turn up several months late.
This makes me the idiot how?
You mean,
He's an ex-spammer, handing over millions of dollars. They're a multinational corporation, regularly investigated for anti-competitive practices:
THEY. FIGHT. CRIME!!!
I'd buy it.
A hard drive is needed for the same reason the XBox needed one. Games are allowed to use a fair bit of the space for temporary caching, swap space and the like. Your XBox Live profile goes on there (and Microsoft have made a big thing about how much detail will be stored over and above last time). Anything you download from XBox Live Arcade (which you will be able to access even on the free Silver level subscription) needs to be stored as well.
Apart from anything, Backward compatibility demands a 750Mb swap partition just for XBox 1 software.
And you think that we won't check for an ethernet port on the back just in case before handing our money over?
They're not doing Internet connections, because it'll kill the portable player market stone dead, and that's a pretty big one to write off in the quest for ever more insane levels of DRM.
I've seen no evidence for 2 SKUs, and certainly nothing to indicate that Microsoft would release a version without a hard drive, when you need one to run games at all.
His entire argument appears to be based on "the hardware is expensive, so Microsoft is going to have to sell it at $399". Did he not notice how it is no more expensive than the XBox they launched last time at $299?