New Xbox could be in development.

[Malak]

I guess, but console users also have to play shooters with analog sticks. Joke's on them. I'll pay the extra money to play specific genres with superior controls as well as having an electronic device that can do a whole lot more than game. People pay premiums for many things in life, I'm sure you're not excluded from that group.

Meh, I got over the whole mouse/kb thing a long time ago. Most RTS's that are any good were made years ago so they play fine on my laptop.

 

[Kabob]

Thoughts? Probably about time, but I'm perfectly with keeping in this generation for quite a while longer.

+1, I'm still perfectly happy with my 360.

How can people say they're still happy with the current consoles? The Xbox 360 was pretty decent in 2005, but it is total crap in 2011. Consoles should come out every 4-5 years. At $400-$500 per console, that's only $100/year - less than the cost of two new games!

Personally, I'd be upset if this is merely when they're starting to develop the next Xbox. I hope this is simply when we're finding out about it, but that it's been in development since ~2008. I can't imagine what a piece of junk the Xbox 360 will be in 2-3 years! Here's hoping for a 11/2012 release!

Because I've got nothing to complain about, solid titles are being consistently released and, while it lacks the pixel power of a PC, they aren't too terrible on the eyes.

Heck, check this thread in the PC forum about Crysis 2, the 360 version isn't THAT much uglier than the PC version.

The Xbox is total crap in 2011? You're a moron.

The reason people are still happy with it is because they still enjoy whats offered. Sounds crazy huh.

Exactly. I've got a decent PC for those really pretty games, I love the simplicity of the 360.

Such a tired argument. I can do lots more than just game on my PC. Of course it costs more.

I do a lot on my console (Gaming, Netflix, Zune market, DVD player, etc). Sure, you can do more on your PC but you're obviously not upgrading every few years for the newest compatibility with MS Office, you're upgrading your hardware for gaming or there'd be no need to upgrade. A Pentium 4/Windows XP machine runs MS Office and surfs the web just as well as an i7/Win 7 machine.

I guess, but console users also have to play shooters with analog sticks. Joke's on them. I'll pay the extra money to play specific genres with superior controls as well as having an electronic device that can do a whole lot more than game. People pay premiums for many things in life, I'm sure you're not excluded from that group.

Seriously, that's what you go for? The sticks? I used to be a PC purist as well, I gave that up in '06 and fell in love with the sticks. I went from sitting in an office chair in a dark, decrepit room of despair playing on a small monitor with my KB/M to playing in a bright living room in an easy chair on a 55" TV. Play with the sticks for a while and you get used to them. Are they as precise as a KB/M? No, not really, but they're not as terrible as the PC crowd makes them out to be.

I'd say the greater letdown of the console is the lack of KB/M for RTS/RPG games. I tried playing LotR: Battle for Middle Earth on the 360 and it was meh, I'd have preferred PC controls there.

But I digest, you go ahead and pay your premiums to keep up with PC gaming, I'd rather spend $300 on a console every 7 years while the whole time getting a plethora of good games that are 100% compatible with my console, no upgrades required.

 

[Pheran]

http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/08/microsoft-goes-on-a-hiring-spree-for-new-xbox-hardware-devs-sta/

Let's hope that the "Design Verification Engineer" they hire is competent this time.

 

[Drako]

Let's hope that the "Design Verification Engineer" they hire is competent this time.

Meh, they just need to stop using Flextronics

 

[Zargon]

Seriously, that's what you go for? The sticks? I used to be a PC purist as well, I gave that up in '06 and fell in love with the sticks. I went from sitting in an office chair in a dark, decrepit room of despair playing on a small monitor with my KB/M to playing in a bright living room in an easy chair on a 55" TV. Play with the sticks for a while and you get used to them. Are they as precise as a KB/M? No, not really, but they're not as terrible as the PC crowd makes them out to be.

LOL ooooooh.

I have a 65" DLP on one of my PC's. So I get real 1080P at 60+ FPS all the time. and the sticks......blarg I tend to agree. they are no mouse and KB

the only thing stopping people from PC gaming on 50 inch screens is themselves........


im going to snipe a few other comments:

A Pentium 4/Windows XP machine runs MS Office and surfs the web just as well as an i7/Win 7 machine.

not really, single cores are so godawful slow anymore

Heck, check this thread in the PC forum about Crysis 2, the 360 version isn't THAT much uglier than the PC version.

crysis 2 is probably a bad example of PC vs Console. Its probably one of the new posterboys for consolitis....


beyond that I am pretty happy with my 360. I have 2(my orig one from ~4.5 years ago and a new arcade from when the new S launched and they were 100 at walmart). Was good enough to keep me from building a HTPC, only reason I have one now is that I built a new gaming rig and lightly upgraded my old one so it could still game along with doing lots of other things...

 

[Malak]

not really, single cores are so godawful slow anymore

You are only using a single core when you browse the web or do office stuff anyway. A late model P4 will do all that just as good as a brand new i7 or whatever the hell is being used these days. I gave up even caring about new hardware, the hardware far far far exceeds the needs of people today.

 

[Anubis]

A Pentium 4/Windows XP machine runs MS Office and surfs the web just as well as an i7/Win 7 machine.

have you smoked crack lately? excel specifically runs orders of magnitude faster on my I7 then it does on my C2Duo work laptop

 

[American Gunner]

I imagine that we are still a couple years out from the new systems being sold, so this would be about right.

 

[Zargon]

You are only using a single core when you browse the web or do office stuff anyway. A late model P4 will do all that just as good as a brand new i7 or whatever the hell is being used these days. I gave up even caring about new hardware, the hardware far far far exceeds the needs of people today.

I highly doubt the P4 keeps up clock for clock. let alone the slower memory, and less of it. I have 2 single core athlong machines that I wont even boot up anymore, they bug me too much to use for anything day to day.

not to mention if you have 2 cores, one can run your office app and the other will continuye to handle the bg processes that would otherwise slow down office to a crawl.

I dont think everyone needs a quad, thats for sure.

but suggesting a P4 would do it all for dayto day is humorous, go load some flash heavy websites and see how that works out

 

[Kabob]

have you smoked crack lately? excel specifically runs orders of magnitude faster on my I7 then it does on my C2Duo work laptop

Nope, no crack has been smoked.

I highly doubt the P4 keeps up clock for clock. let alone the slower memory, and less of it. I have 2 single core athlong machines that I wont even boot up anymore, they bug me too much to use for anything day to day.

not to mention if you have 2 cores, one can run your office app and the other will continuye to handle the bg processes that would otherwise slow down office to a crawl.

I dont think everyone needs a quad, thats for sure.

but suggesting a P4 would do it all for dayto day is humorous, go load some flash heavy websites and see how that works out

Who said a P4 keeps up clock for clock? My point is if that's all you use it for you don't need an upgrade, but you use your PC for much more than that so you choose to upgrade. I didn't say it was the optimum setup, but for the "casual" PC user a P4 would still be fine.

I use a P4 every day at work all day, and every once in a while we go to Flash heavy websites and Excel spreadsheets. It works just fine for those.

 

[American Gunner]

Why all the talk about PC's. Isn't this thread about the possibility of a new console being developed, and it's located in the Console Thread.

 

[Irrational_]

My thread has been derailed.

 

[Soccerman06]

If it makes you feel better, it takes 4ish years for a console to come out once its in development phase (planning phase and contracting can take years). 2 years designing, 2 years silicon and testing/revisions and game development. 2014-15 for new consoles. Last I heard from my source was in Dec and was told that MS and Sony both decided to delay development on consoles to prolong the current systems lifetime. Since then its possible that something has materialized, but doing negotiations and contracts and whatnot takes a little awhile to complete. Yes IBM will be used again.

My only problem with this that MS contracts out hardware development. The 360 was almost completely contracted out with IBM and ATI.

 

[chalmers]

Seriously, that's what you go for? The sticks? I used to be a PC purist as well, I gave that up in '06 and fell in love with the sticks. I went from sitting in an office chair in a dark, decrepit room of despair playing on a small monitor with my KB/M to playing in a bright living room in an easy chair on a 55" TV. Play with the sticks for a while and you get used to them. Are they as precise as a KB/M? No, not really, but they're not as terrible as the PC crowd makes them out to be.

So you say I'm going for a joystick argument when you go for the ever so popular 'dark and decrepit room' counterattack? I've been PC gaming for 20 years, never once played in a dark decrepit room. I game on a 46" LCD in a recliner myself. Nice try though.

But I digest, you go ahead and pay your premiums to keep up with PC gaming, I'd rather spend $300 on a console every 7 years while the whole time getting a plethora of good games that are 100% compatible with my console, no upgrades required.

Ok you do that. I also have a 360. I play it for the genres it was meant to be played on. Shooters aren't one of them. I'll enjoy the superior device. If > $300 every 7 years is putting that much of a hurting on you, you probably don't have enough disposable income to PC game anyway, so you're not their target market.

 

[KentState]

Seeing how consoles have a very flexible OS sitting on standardized hardware, I would gladly pay for a better system if devs could include higher resolution textures with the games.

 

[RedRooster]

So you say I'm going for a joystick argument when you go for the ever so popular 'dark and decrepit room' counterattack? I've been PC gaming for 20 years, never once played in a dark decrepit room. I game on a 46" LCD in a recliner myself. Nice try though.




Ok you do that. I also have a 360. I play it for the genres it was meant to be played on. Shooters aren't one of them. I'll enjoy the superior device. If > $300 every 7 years is putting that much of a hurting on you, you probably don't have enough disposable income to PC game anyway, so you're not their target market.

You should probably just go back to the PC Gaming forum, and leave us to talk about our XBoxs and PS3s. Its obvious where your passion is, and its not in this forum.

 

[chalmers]

You should probably just go back to the PC Gaming forum, and leave us to talk about our XBoxs and PS3s. Its obvious where your passion is, and its not in this forum.

I own a 360. My first post in this thread was because I totally disagreed with a PC vs console comparison made by Malak. Then others responded, and I defended myself.

 

[purbeast0]

Ok you do that. I also have a 360. I play it for the genres it was meant to be played on. Shooters aren't one of them. I'll enjoy the superior device. If > $300 every 7 years is putting that much of a hurting on you, you probably don't have enough disposable income to PC game anyway, so you're not their target market.

if shooters aren't one of them, why are shooters selling much better on consoles than pc?

 

[RavenSEAL]

if shooters aren't one of them, why are shooters selling much better on consoles than pc?

Because that where the market is...?

Consoles are flooded by a billion shooters from hundreds of studios. In PC gaming, there is 1 player, DICE.

Wait til BF3, PC gaming is back baby.

 

[reallyscrued]

So you say I'm going for a joystick argument when you go for the ever so popular 'dark and decrepit room' counterattack? I've been PC gaming for 20 years, never once played in a dark decrepit room. I game on a 46" LCD in a recliner myself. Nice try though.




Ok you do that. I also have a 360. I play it for the genres it was meant to be played on. Shooters aren't one of them. I'll enjoy the superior device. If > $300 every 7 years is putting that much of a hurting on you, you probably don't have enough disposable income to PC game anyway, so you're not their target market.

Classy, thy name is chalmers.

 

[coreyb]

Nope, no crack has been smoked.



Who said a P4 keeps up clock for clock? My point is if that's all you use it for you don't need an upgrade, but you use your PC for much more than that so you choose to upgrade. I didn't say it was the optimum setup, but for the "casual" PC user a P4 would still be fine.

I use a P4 every day at work all day, and every once in a while we go to Flash heavy websites and Excel spreadsheets. It works just fine for those.

I use a p4 every day at work all day also. IT's a slow piece of shit that takes like 5 minutes to load and crashes when running more then one program. I've been SO close to smashing it in pieces because of how slow it is compared to my q6600. you must have a special P4

 

[Pr0d1gy]

As much as these companies want to lie and pretend they don't make money on these consoles, the truth is they obviously do. They wouldn't be making another one already if they weren't, which is why I told people a new console would release in late 2012 or 2013. They just can't resist the lure of profit.

 

[chalmers]

if shooters aren't one of them, why are shooters selling much better on consoles than pc?

Probably the same reason Bud Light outsells Sam Adams, shrug.

 

[JackSpadesSI]

Let me set the record straight: I love my Xbox 360 (and my Xbox before that). I bought an Xbox 360 on launch day, one to replace that one when it broke, and a new Slim just because it was new and shiny. I’d rather play a game on the Xbox 360 than my PC (with a few exceptions). But, that doesn’t mean I’ll pretend that the Xbox 360 is still the gaming machine it was in 2005!

i'm still perfectly happy, there really is nothing that is out that i am saying 'man i wish it had better graphics!!' or anything of that nature.

I played Dragon Age: Origins for an hour this past weekend (ok, I’m late to that party) and I was disgusted by that game’s graphics. It looked awful – particularly the character models.

There is also the issue at play here that modern games still look decent on current consoles only because very few game studios are actually making graphically demanding games anymore. That’s because they know full well that such a game would alienate the massive console base. Games will start to look MUCH better when the next console generation is released.

How is it total crap? The games being released are fine.

Yes, some are. However, there are plenty of new games that look terrible on consoles. See above for detail.

The Xbox is total crap in 2011? You're a moron.

The reason people are still happy with it is because they still enjoy whats offered. Sounds crazy huh.

No, I’m not a moron. The Xbox 360 is crap for more reasons than its graphical shortcomings:

Microsoft’s choice for a long Xbox 360 lifecycle caused stupid mistakes to hinder gaming for a long time. For instance, the Xbox 360 was released with a DVD drive because Microsoft was hesitant to back Sony’s Blu-ray technology (for obvious reasons). While somewhat understandable for 2005, that choice means that all current games must fit onto one (or sometimes two) DVD-9s.

The Xbox 360 is also currently limited to a 250 GB hard drive, which is really terrible for any sort of serious media use. I admit that that is excessive for saved games, and even Xbox Live Arcade games, but as Microsoft wants this to me a media device, it is limiting. It also took WAY too long to get from the original 20 GB to a 250 GB hard drive.

Finally, I think a true “media box” in 2011 should have DVR functionality. That one may just be me, but I think this holds the Xbox 360 back from being a truly useful entertainment box in 2011.

 

[Veliko]

None of what you listed makes the 360 either "GARBAGE" or "total crap".

For a start the fact that the 360 was released without an HD-DVD drive was a smart one because it would have made the console far too expensive at launch. There really isn't much of an issue with games being released on one or two DVD discs.