Xbox 2 before PlayStation 3

[ZX7R]

Taken from www.spong.com

J Allard promises Xbox 2 before PlayStation 3.

In a recent interview, J Allard made the first ever admission that
the Xbox 2 is entering the thoughts of Microsoft central,
promising that the next version of the console will be released
before PlayStation 3.

When quizzed over Sony's pseudo-announcement regarding its
intentions to release the PlayStation 3 in 2005, Allard said, "One
thing we learned that, and we'll promise, is that they won't get
a head start next time. And I'll just leave it at that."

This news comes as the only evidence to date that an Xbox
sequel could well be in the works at Microsoft. Although this is
hardly surprising, the fact that a prospective release date is
already tagged to the machine illustrates Microsoft's medium-term strategy well.

Perhaps this is the start of the great console race,
arguably the next tangible phase in the ongoing war for dominance
of the world's videogames markets.

[El_Dadou]

quite obvious that a Xbrick 2 will soon appear , as it's quite easy to do ...
simply change the CPU , put a NV30 in it ( or better , why not ) , add more ram , and a bigger HDD ...
wow , that are ****ing expensive dev cost ! ( dev cost will be twice that if they pay some ppl to dev a better gamepad .. )
Sony , like all gaming console producer , will totally change the architecture of their console to fit the needs of the player .. they aren't gonna simply overclock the PS2...

[slain]

Yeah dude but that's the beauty of the thing.

Misinformed people always say "Oh but it's just a PC in a big plastic brick", but what is actually wrong with that?

At the end of the day, it's JUST like any other console. It has a CPU, memory, sound/graphics chipsets etc. It is JUST as flexible, because every XBOX is the same, as is every PS2/Gamecube, and has the same theroretical limits. And because every XBOX is the same, the developers don't have to take into account the restrictions of devving for PC's, which is the fact that no two PC's are the same.

Just because it has PC hardware doens't make it a bad thing. It's a good thing, because PC hardware tends to be light-years ahead of the guts of your typical console.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony follow suit to be honest.

[El_Dadou]

well , the fact is that a PC architecture , for now , isn't as promising as a brand new architecture for a news console .
let me explain my meanings ( i'm quite confuse ok ok i know .. ) :
the Xbox is a PC-Like , we all agree with this fact .
PC programation , especially DX8.1 programation , is well known by actual PC developers , so it was quite fast before all the games on the Xbox used the full power of the console . i mean , i'll be really surprised if any games on Xbox will make me say : " damn , halo was crappy compared to this one" . The fact is that the Xbox was fully exploited very soon , when PS2 and GC had to wait some months/years .
look at the first PS2 games : ridge racer V , tekken tag tournament ... i remember , when seeing them first on a jap PS2 , that i told to myself " well , it's obviously nice , but not really kickin ass ..." .
now we have MGS2 , GT3 , GTA3 , devil may cry , auto modellista , colin mcrae 3 ( hmmm , two more weeks to go ) and lots of really good games .
that's how console scene always acted : nice games first , then knowledge of the hardware , then best games .. all the best seller in gaming industry used this scheme : SNES , GB , GBA , DC , PSX , PS2 ...
and now the Xbox allow ppl to have the best looking games ever as soon as the console is out ? what's gonna surprise you then ? nothing , and you'll buy Xbox2 , then two years later Xbox3 , and so on ...congrats dude , you've become a M$ sheep !
that's the only reason i hate the concept of Xbox being considered as a Gaming system like PS2 or GC .. PS2 kicked our ass , and is now outta breath , but GC is already astonishing , and will soon kick our ass again ( outch .. ) .
Xbox impressed me , can't say it didn't ... but it won't impress me anymore , sorry .

PS : sorry for being so long and not as clear as possible , but here are the true thoughts of a french stone gamer

[slain]

Believe me, the XBOX hasn't blown it's load yet.

[El_Dadou]

either you're too optimistic or i am full of shit ...
for tonite , let's call this a draw , ok ?

[Raptor]

as you all know im involved in ps2 AND xbox very heavily

I can say this much - the xbox blows away the ps2 with regards to hacks and capabilities once hacked

ps2 can kiss my ass as far as im concerned

xbox and its 120gb hd rulez

[El_Dadou]

yeah , regards to the hack possibilities , ok , the Xbox is way much tweakable than the PS2 !
but technically , i'm not sure the Xbox's really gonna impress us in the next months ... i mean by the technical use of new technology in games ( for example : Starfox, first 3D game on snes , flink on genesis with more colors on screen than the genesis was supposed to be able to , Vrally3 on GBA , with an astonishing 3D on a handhelp system ... ). Xbox kicked our ass since the beginnign , but won't surprise us , i think . Maybe you know something we don't know rap ? then shaaaaaaaaaare with us
PS2 can't impress us right now as it's kindda old now , that's a fact too ...
Maybe the GC will make us cry like never , who knows ?

[fe_man2000]

Sorry mate I am not flaming you but your are definetly full of sh*t - your words not mine, If you think the programmers on the Xbox have already pushed it 100%.

You argument contains flawed logic at best but thats all - what is your basis for these statments. Are you an Xbox programmer ? Are you familar with the Xbox SDK ? have you any game programming experience on dedicated hardware of any type ? etc, etc ? The CPU architechture on the Xbox is known better that that of the PS1 for example - which by the way was a very hard console to code for and had famously lousy support from Sony until they released an optimising tool very late into its life - which was why it had a sudden burst of excellent games toward the end.

You have obviously played a few consoles in your time from your comments, yet you think that the Xbox is unique among them in its lack of future - strange. By the way the GC is not as far from a PC as you might think my friend - its using an ATI graphics chipset so why doesnt it fall into the same trap as the Xbox ?

Lets not call it a draw after all unless you have more facts.

Regards
Ironman

[El_Dadou]

Originally posted by fe_man2000

By the way the GC is not as far from a PC as you might think my friend - its using an ATI graphics chipset so why doesnt it fall into the same trap as the Xbox ?

Lets not call it a draw after all unless you have more facts.

ok , ok ... lets get some more fact so you'll definitly stop being a fanboy ...
does GC runs x86 environment ? does GC gpu is DX8.1 compliant ? no , of course .
so the developers have to learn how to use them at best , because ALL good developers knows how to use at their full power a x86 env and a DX8.1 gpu !
but i don't know a single man on earth able to say that a GC is close to a PC because it has ATI gpu ... maan , DC had a powerVR inside too , was it a PC ? naaah . and i've never seen windows 95 running on a GC , a PS2 or a DC ... i've seen it running on a Xbrick recently ...
anyhow , yes , i do have experience in devellopment , it's kindda part of my job , so ... and guess what , i'm working on a x86 environment ! no need to say : this environment is the most known ever in cpu history ..
the fact ths box is running a single x86 cpu in an PC architecture made of this a simple cheap PC , not a gaming console , not at least a promising gaming console . now , if you expect from you gaming console to be able to watch divx , play mame and N64 emu , the problem is that you certainly don't know the differences between a gaming console and a PC !

[slain]

Yes, but at the end of a day it's a gaming machine.

And what is the difference between games on consoles and PC's?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Factors such as controllers, sloppy porting etc. can make or break it, but from a technical standpoint, what you're saying is redundant.

At the end of the day the hardware in each and every XBOX is the same (yeah I know about the HDD's and DVD-ROMS, but they're just storage mediums). The developers know EXACTLY what tools they have to play with. Just like, you guessed it, GC and PS2.

What you're basically saying is 'If the XBOX can be pushed further than it already is, why havn't they already done so with PC games that use DX 8.1?'.

The reason for that is very simple. When developing PC games, you have to take into account that there is a HUGE number of differently configured machines about. Some have Geforce 2's, 3's ,4's... and some use ATi Radeon boards. Some people prefer Athlons to P4's. Some people like their Turtle Beach sound cards more than their Audigys. To achieve greater compatibility, PC games are HELD back.

Anyone remember when they first saw the original Tekken for the PSX? EVERYONE was blown away. The CPU in the PSX is equivilent to a 486 SX33. Look at Tekken 3, and tell me what spec of CPU that would need. Much more than a lowly 486 SX33 I can tell you now. And you know, those achievements on the PSX wern't down to the hardware at all. It was down to the luxury of knowing exactly what you're devving for, and down to some very clever code.

This is exactly the same with the XBOX, no matter what hardware is under the bonnet. It's as simple as that.

I know I'll sound like a wannabe-mod saying this, but enough of this "it's just a PC" shit already.

[capt_peo]

Xbox has its limits drawn already, its a cheap pc, what the hell? PC games get better every month, every 6 months u have to buy a new video card. PC games are better than the xbox's, so in porting them thay have to take away shiet. It may be better than the PS2 but the PS2's potential hasnt been exploited yet, unlike the xbox's.

[El_Dadou]

Originally posted by slain

What you're basically saying is 'If the XBOX can be pushed further than it already is, why havn't they already done so with PC games that use DX 8.1?'.

no , that's not what i'm saying , try to read more carefully next time .
i fecking knows why the PC are lowered down , any Hardware Abstraction Layer is slowing down execut1on time , when there's no need to do that for Xbox , thanks for teaching me dummy things .
i mean that given the fact that the Xbox is build over a known architecture ,a very well known one , there hasn't been any "discover challenge" for devellopers : they already knew how to get the best from the box , because they didn't have to learn its architecture , they didn't have to test algorithms to see wich one is best processed by CPU or GPU , because THEY ALREADY KNEW how does react a x86 CPU and a DX8.1 GPU !
so it's a fact that the Xbox is a kicking ass machine , with lots of awesome looking game ( even if only halo has some interest to me , but that's another problem ) , and those game had been developed in the first year of the console . so , i do not think that next generation games for the Xbox will be more impressive , as the brixk is already at full speed , or almost ( at least its potential is way more exploited now as the PS2 potential was at the same time . )
that's what i mean , in fact : there won't be any impressive progresion for Xbox games , so they'll have to produce a Xbox 2 , then a Xbox 3 , always following the PC standart architecture ..
it's good and bad at the same time : good , because of the cheap dev cost , PC to box portability , etc ...
bad , because an XBox generation will be only a couple of year , and we'll forget what mean "Next Gen Gaming" ...
and for the last time : THIS IS NO FLAMING THREAD , just argumented observation ... so quit re-flaming ...

[El_Dadou]

Originally posted by capt_peo
... but the PS2's potential hasnt been exploited yet, unlike the xbox's.

hmm , this is almost fanboying dude
well , anyway , i think you're a little bit too optimistic .. PS2 potential has been fully exploited with games like MGS2 , GTA3 ... everything we'll see since those won't impress us by their technology , i think ... hope i'm wrong , but chances are slim ...

[TGD]

ps2 been out for three years

Xbox been out for one year

Do the math and figure out which is closer to having its hardware fully tapped at this point. Xbox has two years on the ps2, and that equals two years better technology....any fanboy that says the xbox has reached its potential where the ps2 hasnt is down right stupid or dont know what the hell they are talking about or just a schmuck fanboy.

[slain]

TGD tell me about it.

They're saying that because the XBOX uses an x86 CPU and DX8.1 GPU, that somehow the devvers already know how to get the most out of it.

El_Dadou, you're not reading MY posts. Tell me when any PC games developer has had the luxury of knowing that all the "target systems" for his game are all exactly the same.

Answer: Never

Hense this is why x86 on the desktop PC level has a relatively shelf-life, and x86 on a console gaming level has a much longer shelf-life.

You understand?

[fe_man2000]

OK lets cover some ground rules first.

>> no , that's not what i'm saying , try to read more carefully next time .
i fecking knows why the PC are lowered down , any Hardware Abstraction Layer is slowing down execut1on time , when there's no need to do that for Xbox , thanks for teaching me dummy things .

First - please stop being a rude arrogant newbie. Thankyou.

>>ok , ok ... lets get some more fact so you'll definitly stop being a fanboy ...

Stop calling eveyone a FANBOY - do you even know what that means - its very ANNOYING.

>>but i don't know a single man on earth able to say that a GC is close to a PC because it has ATI gpu ... maan , DC had a powerVR inside too , was it a PC ? naaah . and i've never seen windows 95 running on a GC , a PS2 or a DC ... i've seen it running on a Xbrick recently ...

You havent got a clue have you ? the DreamCast was running Microsoft windows CE !!!!!!! AND was Direct X compatible.

here is some info from the web FANBOY.

"Windows CE and DirectX Dreamcast versions Technology Information!
For licensed developers of games for the Sega Dreamcast home video game system, the Microsoft® Windows® CE operating system with the DirectX® API provides a flexible, optimized development environment supported by the Microsoft Visual C++® development system that eases title development and provides true cross-platform compatibility with Windows-based PCs."

Of course there has never been a console running windows before - it needs a load of memory and an an compatible processor (and lets face it is a waste of time) - And no one is arguing that the CPU is not new in the Xbox - its not the issue. Most of the work is done on the GPU on the Xbox which is not being fully pushed yet and is not using the same bandwidth as a PC. Its as new as the ATI one in the GC and the powerVR one in the DC was when it was released.


Your basic argument seems to be the intel CPU is well know hence the Xbox has already done its best work as its easy to program. Dont you think this is an over simplifying ? This seem to be all of your case, no mention of the new GPU, higher memory bandwidth etc. You are also unaware of other consoles in the past -e.g Dreamcast with similar setups. If you really believe this is the case then thats OK but personally I think your wrong and extremely narow minded and this isnt just an Xbox thing I'm sure the GC has a lot more to offer as well.

Cheers
Ironman

[El_Dadou]

well , let me add a simple fact : we all know that the DC had two development environment : one with WinCe , other one named katana ( if my memories are correct ) .
Do you know how many games were developed with WinCe environment ? i heard that we can count 'em on one hands fingers ..

[fe_man2000]

so in other words you have no reply.

[fe_man2000]

I dont understand - programing for it was so well understood ! Surely they would have made more games in CE than that - it would have been so easy to use all of the power of the DC right at the begining of its life - just like they are on the Xbox.