Xbox 2 PC would be amazing for MS and the consumer...
by jesusphreak · in General Discussion · 03/15/2005 (8:43 pm) · 31 replies
I was just thinking about this.
There was talk a few months back about how MS would release 3 version of the Xbox 2.
1) the base version w/out a hard drive
2) the base version and you buy the hard drive add-on
3) the base version w/ hard drive and it could play PC games
Now think about this, if MS put out an Xbox 2 PC this year, it would make a KILLING, and it would make so many gamers happy.
All accounts say that MS will be making a profit off of the Xbox 2 hardware. That's why that got rid of a lot of the little extra things, and focused on cost efficiency. Its one of the main reasons no hard drive will likely be in the base version of Xbox 2.
Its also worth noting that the Xbox 2 will be FAR more powerful than any consumer PC on the market come this fall. It will be a few more months if not half a year until PC video cards catch up, and you won't be seeing tri-core 3 gig processors until late 2006 or even 2007, likely. Even so, these technologies won't be cheap early on at all.
So, let's say MS puts out an Xbox 2 PC this fall that retails at $500. Its a full-blown computer and it also plays Xbox 2 games. Just think about how many of those they'd sell. $500 is 1/3 of the price of the cheapest top-of-the-line PCs out there today, and none of them can play Xbox 2 games, and then the Xbox 2 would be far more powerful than anything available.
It'd also be small, nice looking, and just a lot cooler than any PC tower.
MS would make a KILLING. So many PC gamers would buy one, and so many people who wouldn't even normally get an Xbox 2 or a PC would get one.
It would be such a boon to gaming. I'd absolutely love something like this to happen. It'd also give MS a really nice grip on the PC gaming market and give them a nice profit off their consoles for doing little more than adding a hard drive and some software.
What do you think?
There was talk a few months back about how MS would release 3 version of the Xbox 2.
1) the base version w/out a hard drive
2) the base version and you buy the hard drive add-on
3) the base version w/ hard drive and it could play PC games
Now think about this, if MS put out an Xbox 2 PC this year, it would make a KILLING, and it would make so many gamers happy.
All accounts say that MS will be making a profit off of the Xbox 2 hardware. That's why that got rid of a lot of the little extra things, and focused on cost efficiency. Its one of the main reasons no hard drive will likely be in the base version of Xbox 2.
Its also worth noting that the Xbox 2 will be FAR more powerful than any consumer PC on the market come this fall. It will be a few more months if not half a year until PC video cards catch up, and you won't be seeing tri-core 3 gig processors until late 2006 or even 2007, likely. Even so, these technologies won't be cheap early on at all.
So, let's say MS puts out an Xbox 2 PC this fall that retails at $500. Its a full-blown computer and it also plays Xbox 2 games. Just think about how many of those they'd sell. $500 is 1/3 of the price of the cheapest top-of-the-line PCs out there today, and none of them can play Xbox 2 games, and then the Xbox 2 would be far more powerful than anything available.
It'd also be small, nice looking, and just a lot cooler than any PC tower.
MS would make a KILLING. So many PC gamers would buy one, and so many people who wouldn't even normally get an Xbox 2 or a PC would get one.
It would be such a boon to gaming. I'd absolutely love something like this to happen. It'd also give MS a really nice grip on the PC gaming market and give them a nice profit off their consoles for doing little more than adding a hard drive and some software.
What do you think?
#2
For one, they are only using a DVD drive, which are a ton cheaper than they were 4 years ago, and a good deal cheaper than HD-DVD or Blu-Ray (what Sony will be using). Also, the removal of the hard drive saves a lot of money as well.
03/15/2005 (9:04 pm)
MS from the beginning has been attempting to get Xbox 2 hardware cost down (they don't want to be losing money on every console like they did with Xbox 1). For one, they are only using a DVD drive, which are a ton cheaper than they were 4 years ago, and a good deal cheaper than HD-DVD or Blu-Ray (what Sony will be using). Also, the removal of the hard drive saves a lot of money as well.
#3
03/15/2005 (10:42 pm)
If they did this, and the PC-Box was a viable gaming option for PC games, then I think you would see a rise in Linux installations. I know more than a few people (myself included) whose primary reason for keeping windows as theiir main OS is to play games.
#5
However, I have to ask:
1) would this affect sales of Windows?
2) Would MS tolerate that?
03/16/2005 (12:40 am)
Yep, it would be killer for MS, I think as of now it would be good for consumers, I'm not sure about in the long run.However, I have to ask:
1) would this affect sales of Windows?
2) Would MS tolerate that?
#6
Link
At this point, who knows if they are still considering doing it, but its interesting none the less.
03/16/2005 (12:43 am)
Here's one of the earliest mentions of it:Quote:a device it refers to as Xbox Next PC "a videogame console system with a hard drive and a built-in fully functional PC." Mention of the device came on one of several slides shown to focus groups.
One slide describes the unit, which would require a PC monitor or high definition television, as being backward compatible with current and next-generation Xbox titles. It would also play PC games and include a fully functional version of Windows, CD burner, DVD player (with remote control), built-in access to Xbox Live and a hard drive. Control-wise, the system would come with both a keyboard and mouse and a standard Xbox controller. The price point this particular study tested was $599.
Link
At this point, who knows if they are still considering doing it, but its interesting none the less.
#7
Knowing MS that doesn't mean it is dead and buried, just "on-hold".
03/16/2005 (1:35 am)
Hmm, I can't remember where or when I read it but what sticks is that MS scrapped their plans for a multi-function-unit (IIRC about the same time the Sony PS-X flopped), and concentrated focus on a pure gaming console.Knowing MS that doesn't mean it is dead and buried, just "on-hold".
#8
I don't think an XBox 2 based PC would be as powerful as you think. This 3 core thing only sounds good on paper. As for running PC games er yea in what reality was that statement made!
This kind of reminds me of the emotion engine nonsense that sony spouted before the PS2 came out. Apparently that was capable of doing real time mega physics. What wasn't nemtioned was that once all the parts of a game are in place there was precious little processing oomph left over for anything let alone realistic physics.
Take the pre-release hype of consol manufaturers for what it is i.e. pre-release hype, nothing more, nothing less. You'll see that while XBox2 will be powerful, it will not be nearly as amazing as it sounded before it came out. Similarly for PS3 and Revolution. All of which I might add, use pretty much the same hardware as each-other. This more than anything, tells me that the new machines will be made or broken by their games and nothing else.
03/16/2005 (3:32 am)
@jesusphreakI don't think an XBox 2 based PC would be as powerful as you think. This 3 core thing only sounds good on paper. As for running PC games er yea in what reality was that statement made!
This kind of reminds me of the emotion engine nonsense that sony spouted before the PS2 came out. Apparently that was capable of doing real time mega physics. What wasn't nemtioned was that once all the parts of a game are in place there was precious little processing oomph left over for anything let alone realistic physics.
Take the pre-release hype of consol manufaturers for what it is i.e. pre-release hype, nothing more, nothing less. You'll see that while XBox2 will be powerful, it will not be nearly as amazing as it sounded before it came out. Similarly for PS3 and Revolution. All of which I might add, use pretty much the same hardware as each-other. This more than anything, tells me that the new machines will be made or broken by their games and nothing else.
#9
I really doubt they will do an xbox pc though. There is too many ways that it can make pirating easier.
I do admit that there is a chance though. With all this XNA stuff and talks about how easy it will be to port from pc to xbox and visa versa.
Also considering the recent swing of MS thinking. Stuff like .net which they hope will one day allow complete dumb terminals and no cds to buy all the way down to how they are making xbox more like a webTV. It does sort of roll with there flow.
So I guess we will either find out at E3 or at the end of the year
03/16/2005 (3:58 am)
Peter, have you ever gutted a xbox? It's a damn pc. Of course its not a true pc but it's pretty damn close.I really doubt they will do an xbox pc though. There is too many ways that it can make pirating easier.
I do admit that there is a chance though. With all this XNA stuff and talks about how easy it will be to port from pc to xbox and visa versa.
Also considering the recent swing of MS thinking. Stuff like .net which they hope will one day allow complete dumb terminals and no cds to buy all the way down to how they are making xbox more like a webTV. It does sort of roll with there flow.
So I guess we will either find out at E3 or at the end of the year
#10
Having a version with a hard drive and without one is just stupid in my opinion. Developers developing a game that used the hard drive would be limiting their audience and thus probably wouldn't even consider using the hard drive. So anyone that bought the hd version would be pissing away money.
03/16/2005 (5:26 am)
I hope MS doesn't come out with 3 versions of the console. That hurts one of the benefits for developing on a console. Standard platform.Having a version with a hard drive and without one is just stupid in my opinion. Developers developing a game that used the hard drive would be limiting their audience and thus probably wouldn't even consider using the hard drive. So anyone that bought the hd version would be pissing away money.
#11
I wouldn't even expect xbox compatibility, much less PC.
With 256 megs you won't be able to run most modern PC games, since the xbox 2 (or 360, or whatever it's called this week) doesn't run a full version of windows (only the kernel), and if it's like the first one, everything is statically linked, while PC games often have dynamic dependencies.
A lot of modern PC games need way more than 256 megs, on top of needing a full windows install...
03/16/2005 (6:50 am)
Xbox next is not a PC, it doesn't use a PC CPU and if it's compatible with the first one, it will be by emulating x86 functionality (hint : the 3 cores are PowerPC based). I wouldn't even expect xbox compatibility, much less PC.
With 256 megs you won't be able to run most modern PC games, since the xbox 2 (or 360, or whatever it's called this week) doesn't run a full version of windows (only the kernel), and if it's like the first one, everything is statically linked, while PC games often have dynamic dependencies.
A lot of modern PC games need way more than 256 megs, on top of needing a full windows install...
#12
Where did you hear that console companies typically lose money on hardware?
My understanding is that MS did this with the Xbox, and Sega did it with some of their consoles, but Nintendo and Sony profit on hardware.
03/16/2005 (8:52 am)
Quote:Typically console companies lose large amounts of money on the hardware and rake in the profit on the games. Where did you hear that the XBox2 will be profitable?
Where did you hear that console companies typically lose money on hardware?
My understanding is that MS did this with the Xbox, and Sega did it with some of their consoles, but Nintendo and Sony profit on hardware.
#13
03/16/2005 (9:25 am)
This discussion is somewhat worthless, because anyone who knows enough to contribute to the discussion is under NDAs, so it's a bunch of speculations based on speculation that ends with people drawing conclusions and arguing points that may or may not even be realistic. 
#14
03/16/2005 (9:41 am)
Yes... everyone calm down and wait for E3. All will be reveled.
#15
Read some books like Game Over and talk to some retailers. Consoles either just break even or lose money because they are too expensive when they are brand new technologies to sell for a profit. It's a better idea to build up a huge player base by losing money on the console and then make the big profits on all the games. This idea was used by Nintendo as well as Nolan Bushnell with Atari. In fact one part of the downfall of Atari was when the board ignored Nolan Bushnell and attempted to sell the console for a profit ... thus decreasing their user base. The money is always made on the games ... not on the hardware, at least till the end of the hardware's lifecycle when it's outdated and cheap to make.
03/16/2005 (9:45 am)
Quote:
Where did you hear that console companies typically lose money on hardware?
Read some books like Game Over and talk to some retailers. Consoles either just break even or lose money because they are too expensive when they are brand new technologies to sell for a profit. It's a better idea to build up a huge player base by losing money on the console and then make the big profits on all the games. This idea was used by Nintendo as well as Nolan Bushnell with Atari. In fact one part of the downfall of Atari was when the board ignored Nolan Bushnell and attempted to sell the console for a profit ... thus decreasing their user base. The money is always made on the games ... not on the hardware, at least till the end of the hardware's lifecycle when it's outdated and cheap to make.
#16
If they do decide to sell it wholesale for less than what it costs to build it, then yes, they lose some money on each unit (not a lot).
I somehow doub this, when you think back at the release price for both the xbox and ps2.
Afaik, when it's said that MS and Sony lost money, or still lose money, on xbox or PS2, they mean when you factor in the R&D costs, which can be in the billion dollars.
Again, electronics are cheap to mass produce, once you have your implementatino stabilized. What is expensive is the R&D and associated development costs to bring such an implementation to market.
And yes, Pat is right, it's all pretty much speculation at this point even if you're sure your source has access to the latest xbox 2 devkit...
03/16/2005 (10:58 am)
Actually, they don't lose money on the hw itself : that's cheap. If they do decide to sell it wholesale for less than what it costs to build it, then yes, they lose some money on each unit (not a lot).
I somehow doub this, when you think back at the release price for both the xbox and ps2.
Afaik, when it's said that MS and Sony lost money, or still lose money, on xbox or PS2, they mean when you factor in the R&D costs, which can be in the billion dollars.
Again, electronics are cheap to mass produce, once you have your implementatino stabilized. What is expensive is the R&D and associated development costs to bring such an implementation to market.
And yes, Pat is right, it's all pretty much speculation at this point even if you're sure your source has access to the latest xbox 2 devkit...
#17
I think the metric that was bandied about a lot was you had to buy at least four games for your xbox for microsft to start seeing a profit.
03/16/2005 (11:03 am)
AFAIK to release a game on the XBox or PS2 you have to go through the respective manufacturers, and that costs.I think the metric that was bandied about a lot was you had to buy at least four games for your xbox for microsft to start seeing a profit.
#18
Pat, whats wrong with discussing this stuff? As long as it doesn't turn into flaming, there is nothing wrong. Aren't you the same person who said, "Get a real language", "making games with C# is bullsh-t"?
03/16/2005 (11:16 am)
From what I understand, MS and Sony are both profiting off of PS2 and Xbox at this point, and I can't imagine Nintendo allowing itself to lose money on GameCube.Pat, whats wrong with discussing this stuff? As long as it doesn't turn into flaming, there is nothing wrong. Aren't you the same person who said, "Get a real language", "making games with C# is bullsh-t"?
#19
03/16/2005 (12:26 pm)
The typical hardware model is to start by selling at a loss and end by selling at a profit. You can do this because of manufacturing advances that occur during the hardware's lifetime, among other things. Witness the huge cost-cutting revisions the PSX went through (do we have to call it PS1 now that there's another piece of hardware called PSX?).
#20
03/16/2005 (1:04 pm)
All I was saying was the C# development was a bunch of people discussing things where the majority had an informed opinion. Nobody can have an informed opinion on Xbox 2 and discuss specifics in public. That's really all I'm saying: discuss away...but even the whole "3 different models" and any specs that people have been throwing around are all speculation. I just don't like having wildly speculative discussions about hardware which is under heavy NDAs. 
Torque 3D Owner Ken Paulson
Default Studio Name