Top
1070°

Xbox 720 detailed: Blu-ray inside, always-on netcon required

Xbox 720 has been fully detailed to some third-parties, VG247 has learned, and has been slotted in for a Christmas 2013 released. And yes: of course it’ll have a Blu-ray drive.

The story is too old to be commented.
LX-General-Kaos1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

If this is real.. Having to be connected to the internet at all times will make for some interesting conversation on this site. The rumored specs with the AMD 7000 series is amazing news as well if true. With specs like the ones mentioned, the XBOX 720 would surpass my 6850 sporting Cyberpower PC. Which can already max out most games, so this is great news for people planning on purchasing the XBOX 720.. If these rumors are true.

The inclusion of bluray is nice as well. Hopefully that will eliminate disc swapping for larger games.

I guess its safe to say that XBOX fans should start saving the loose change now. This has a fair chance at being an expensive machine.

Anyway I hope this system is made as strong and as complete as possible so I can prepare for the future of HALO. And for the love of god hopefully a Halowars 2. May we all bow our heads and pray for the return of these monsterous games. With specs like mentioned above, this machine will also do wonders for the #1 pro racing sim franchise in the world. The Forza franchise.

Rated E For Everyone

Aggesan1548d ago

People need to chill a bit about the amd 7000. It might be in the low end part of the series just as well as the high end. Your 6850 is way more powerfull than a low end 7000 card.

SleazyChimp1548d ago

Yeah but this is a dual gpu set up. Thats what is exciting. Dual 7000s optimized to the hilt is gonna be a beast. It'll be able to keep pace with pc for the next 5-6yrs just like the 360 did. I also would think this would have to make the new box more than 6x more powerful than the 360 as was reported earlier.

JsonHenry1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

Yeah, you get a lot of bang for your buck out a dual GPU set-up even at the lower end of the Tahiti line-up.

MAJ0R1548d ago

Actually dual GPU's can have more disadvantages than advantages. For one, optimization could be a hard thing for 3rd party games. Even some PC games have a hard time being optimized for two GPU's. Remember, dual GPU's = more heat, more heat = slower clock speeds than a single GPU.

If that's the case and some games can't utilize both GPU's, a game could be running off of an under clocked GPU. It could end up being a similar situation for the next Xbox as the Cell architecture was for the PS3.

Dante1121548d ago

Online all the time? MS think they're slick since you know they're gonna charge for Live again. And what if you have an outage with your internet, can't play single player games? Sucks, guess I won't be buying the next Microsoft console.

dirthurts1548d ago

Dual video cards...eww.
I hope not. Too much heat, scaling issues, compatibility problems, why would MS go through that?
I'm calling BS.
Always on internet? That would be a very poor decision. I know a lot of gamers who don't have their xbox's online.

Halochampian1548d ago

@Dante

Sony is rumored to be doing the same thing. I really don't like the idea.

Hopefully it's not true for either console

cas851548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

Perhaps it's gonna be a single high performance card for games and a single low performance chip for less demanding tasks such as video playback and applications. It would greatly reduce power consumption, heat, expand the lifespan of the console and reduce energy wastage if the high performance chip could be turned off when not needed. But who knows...

snipes1011548d ago

The more I hear about the next generation of consoles (anti used games and now always online), rumor or not, the more I am beginning to think that console manufacturers are making a physical effort to make gaming suck. This is garbage and if it's true I might finally say screw it and go PC.

vulcanproject1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

I'll quote myself:

I said for a while Dual GPU would actually be possible, and actually fairly smart to start with and work well in consoles because the developers would be able to code for it.

Why? Well it is a well known fact that two midrange GPUs can edge out a high end, very expensive GPU, while not actually costing any more. One recent example being GTX560 SLI comfortably bests a single GTX580, but actually costs less! This has been going on for some time now and there are prior examples of most generations. 5750 crossfire usually beating or at least matching one GTX285 for considerably less cost.

How is this possible? Simple, midrange or lower mid parts are much much easier and most importantly cheaper to make. They will always have better yields, wider tolerances than big, hot, brand new cutting edge designs.

In short it is far more difficult and often more expensive and ultimately slower to build one big fast chip than it is to just design two smaller slower ones and run them together.

Besides the fact scaling on PC games heavily rely on driver level optimisations to work properly with dual GPUs, console games would have no such hurdles. A developer would design the game to specifically use both GPUs to maximum every time. This is why console hardware is more efficient with its assets anyway, PC does use brute force to beat it.

Designing a good midrange GPU, pairing them together on a hugely fast bandwidth bus and fitting them to a console does actually make more financial and developmental sense than you might imagine.

Saturn had Dual graphics, so it is not a new idea for consoles.

Also, the kind of access developers could have to a pair of GPUs could work very much like Lucid Hydra http://www.pcper.com/review... where you can split scene rendering between the GPUs to get superb scaling rather than brute force dumb alternate frame rendering.

tokugawa1547d ago

how much ram?? has a figure been mentioned??

iggsta3o51547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

Sleazy Chimp graphics cards for computers release twice a year, and processors ounce a year. By the time this console hits the market it would only be 1-2 years before the console becomes obsolete. This timeline is being optimistic at best. The reason consoles will never compare to PC graphics and tech is because they would have to build new consoles every year. It would be to expensive and not in any way profitable.

Information Minister1547d ago

@ vulcanproject:

True, but don't forget that we're talking about a console here, so you have to factor in power consumption, heat output, PCB complexity, form factor and weight. Having 2 GTX560 in SLI, each with their own individual board, heatsink and fan on a PC is completely different from applying that same combination of GPUs on a console with limited space. Even if the 2 chips themselves were cheaper than a more powerful single GPU, the cost of integrating them on the system would be higher. Failure rates would also be higher, as you would have more components that could malfunction.

Also, one of the main reasons why the Saturn was more expensive than the PS1 was because of how complex the thing was to assemble, with its higher number of individual chips, which in turn made it harder to program for.

Personally, I won't give this rumor much credit.

Rumor1547d ago

I'm really excited for this next gen of consoles. It's my college years also so I'm a bit afraid for my future :-0

vulcanproject1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

@ Info minister.

I pre empted your thoughts, lower down in the discussion about power consumption, heat, layout etc outlining how it is indeed possible, economically viable in the current situation. Go have a read. They cover virtually everything you raised and explained them in detail. The cost along with power consumption itself is becoming more and more favourable for two smaller chips, as i explained. The fact a better cooling system would cost a few dollars more but a larger chip in the near future economics of the semiconductor industry could costs tens more, for each part.

PC multi GPU is a different proposition from a custom console, but nearly only in positive ways. The fact we have seen dual GPU before in a console was just an example of how this is easily more possible than you and others have made out.

Having seen the way the industry is going, I consider myself in a decent position to explain this to naysayers of such an idea.

Indeed it would be far easier to build a console chipset to accommodate 2 graphics chips and far more compact and controllable in a custom design than any PC. I pointed out about fail rates in the lower post too....

Saturn was a mess because it was not designed carefully enough and the concept was flawed. But then it WAS out long before modern dual GPU technology in PC systems became very commonplace. Since Saturn launched it is obvious that dual GPU technology has matured massively, over the past 8 years.

As i have said in my post right here and the one further below, it is entirely viable at this point in time and indeed if manufacturers have looked into the future as they should even more viable then!

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 1547d ago
ChrisW1548d ago

I was hoping that MS wouldn't have to resort to Blu-Ray. But then again, if they don't do digital download, their choices are slim.

Fishy Fingers1548d ago

Why? Its established, future proof for the life of the next gen. Cheap, flexible, read/write speeds are much improved.

Introducing a new format would be a pointless expense to the manufacturers, to the production companies (middle men) and most importantly, to us, the consumer.

Tonester9251548d ago

yeah what happened to the "We don't need Blu-Ray"

ziggurcat1548d ago

@ tonester925:

i think that went away as soon as X360 owners saw that they were getting stuck with games on 2 - 3 discs.

also, content on a few games (i believe lost planet 2, and FFXIII) had to get cut due to the lack of space.

sak5001548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

@tonester925

You know what happened to "We don't need Blu-Ray", it lasted 7 years Dec 2005 ~ Dec 2013 (new xbox). Ordered in Dec 2k5 i got mine in Jan2k6. Glad I didn't have to pay premium for a trial underutilized storage device which was still not needed at the end of the current generation.

Dual / Triple discs don't matter to PC and 360 owners only handful of games even this late require 2 Discs at the most. I surely would be p#$##d also when the promised uber BD games still ended up being 5~6 hours and graphics at par with the DVD based console.

I never bought BD player as well I got all my HD watching on media tanks and xb360. But if the next gen xbox comes with BD it will be teh right time.

WHat i dont like about this rumored idea of always on net requirement. I doubt ms will go that path.

insomnium21548d ago TrollingShow
_Aarix_1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

Blu ray is just a higher storage disc. Nothing magical about it like you guys practically say it is. It doesnt sense that microsoft would deal with patents and crap whenever they easily have the resourses to make their own media format.

It wasnt needed as bad as you think anyway. I mean after seeing all the content gears of war and skyrim had and only used one disc. Though next gen dvd will be suicide.

PimpDaddy1548d ago

What made sak500's comment a fanboy comment? He is correct. Blu-Ray wasn't needed this generation as far as for use in videogames.

95% of all Xbox 360 games run on one disc. The games that use multiple discs did not ruin the gameplay experience whatsoever.

I bought my PS3 to have a Blu-Ray player for movies and to also play a few PS3 exclusives. That's it. The value of Blu-Ray this generation was as an HD movie player. The short single player campaigns and mandatory installs for PS3 games just further proves this point.

Christopher1548d ago

***Blu-Ray wasn't needed this generation as far as for use in videogames. ***

If you didn't have BD this generation, you wouldn't have had it going forward. The fact of the matter is that people grow to fully utilize new technology. If the technology is only put out absolutely when it is needed, you prevent rapid progress.

So, without BD last decade, this decade would be playing catch up.

Christopher1548d ago

***Blu ray is just a higher storage disc. Nothing magical about it like you guys practically say it is.***

So is the DVD, but the DVD was an advancement on read rates and storage.

BD allows for a higher average/constant read/write speed (means you can stream data at higher rates at a constant rate rather than the variable rate of DVDs) and is also more durable.

If that's not enough and you downplay it? You're the same person who thinks that 8 cores is just 8x as many cores as we used to have, so that's not much.

Hanif-8761548d ago

Please clap for the most retarded comment of the day!

PimpDaddy1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

My statement stands. The Xbox 360 and Wii got by this generation without Blu-Ray. So it wasn't needed. Sony could have used DVD this generation too and been just fine.

Edit: Pixelsword. How many games were "gimped"? If you saying that a few games out of hundreds of games required more than one DVD disc is proof of Blu-Ray being needed then I guess CD-ROM wasn't good enough for the PS1 either since I had games that used multiple CD's. Again my statement stands. Blu-Ray was not needed. It was a luxury and not a necessity.

pixelsword1548d ago

@pimp;

If every game could fit on one DVD I'd agree with ya, but since not only were games intentionally gimped because of DVD, but there are a number of instances were two or more discs were needed; so no, although I won't press the disagree, I don't agree.

sak5001548d ago

Well said pimpdaddy +bubbs.

One can see from agrees and disagrees here that Sony fanboys even hate it when people diss bluray as if its a violation against their beliefs.

Christopher1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

@PimpDaddy: Your choice to ignore the progression of technology is perfectly fine. You go right ahead. That doesn't mean that the technology doesn't grow to fit the medium.

What I'm saying that if we were still using DVD and there was no BD disc, what would we have right now? We would have the start of BD discs, which would be very costly, less likely to be supported globally, and would be in competition like it was last gen. By getting that all out of the way, we now have a format that can meet the demands of the next generation, isn't expensive, and has hardware advances that make it equal in cost to the old format. Transition to it will be pretty much seamless as opposed to if it was still new technology.

So, your definition of 'need' might be a bit myopic in the overall scheme of things.

I guess we also don't need alternative power sources until we're sure we've destroyed the planet by your logic.

glennco1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

i don't get the blu-ray comments. if they are going to stay with physical media why wouldn't they go blu-ray... or is this another fanboy BS war rehashing old battles thing. some sort of gloating or something juvenile like that. naturally next gen games will require a lot more storage than any other gen.

putting comments like "yeah what happened to the "We don't need Blu-Ray"" is so n4g. idiotic fanboy comments that offer absolutely zero to the conversation.

so far i have never once had to put in a second disc, never ever.

why am i even bothering debating with children

sikbeta1547d ago

Blu-Ray is needed, XBX3 will benefit from it, everybody wins, why go against it?

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 1547d ago
mcstorm1548d ago

I agree with you if this is true then the next xbox will be a monster console. I will be picking up the next xbox no matter what anyway just like I will the WiiU and PS4. Im looking forward to seeing what MS do with Kinect next gen too as it will have the device out of the box which means everything will be made around Kinect and xbox live which to me will show off the best of Kinect for core and none core gaems as well as media ect.

I also think 2013 will be a good year to bring out the next 360 as they would have Turn10 working on a Forza 5 as a release game and maybe even a Gears 4 as well as all the content the 360 has now plus more added to it put the next xbox in a good pension to keep the xbox brand as big as it is now.

I hope we get another 12 months out of the 360 and PS3 as they still have some amazing games to offer but 2013 will be the right year for MS to bring out the next xbox.

asmith23061548d ago

Kinect will never enchance 'core' games as long as it doesn't involve a controller; and then that defeats the purpose of it in the first place. How can you move around in a game world without a controller and remain feasible? When it comes to gaming, Kinect is limited to rails.

LX-General-Kaos1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

@ asmith2306

Have you heard of the phrase "Better with Kinect"

Believe it or not there are a few games out there that are enhanced by kinect. Even if the enhancements are small, they are still part of the experience.

Mass Effect 3, and Forza 4, and Ghost Recon Future are the examples I can remember as of now.

Examples..

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

@ asmith2306
I mentioned in this very same post that there are "a few games" that are enhanced. I never said anything about Kinect having this massive list of games. I already provided proof that there are enhanced games.

I never even said anything about the enhancements being big or even worth anyones time. Just the fact that they exist.

Rated E For Everyone

asmith23061548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

@Kaos
Give me stats on how many people really use these features. My guess is the number would not be high because most gamers who play these kinds of games couldn't care less about these features. Oh and by the way, I meant enhance core gaming as a genre, maybe I should have said advance. I have no problem with the features you put to me but they are nothing more than 'oh wow, look at that' and then forget ten mins later.

@kaos
so a few games are enhanced, big deal. My whole point was that if Kinect can't do anything to really push core games forward in any way bar a few little features then it is stuck in casual land. Thats cool if your a casual gamer and thats your thing; but for me (who had a 360 on day one and have had three since) the name Xbox was and should be synonymous with core gaming. Microsoft are taking it in the opposite direction. And no, they can't co exist in my opinion. If their direction is casual there will be very little room for innovation and risk when it comes to new core ips.

LX-General-Kaos1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

@ asmith2306

Agreed with your post above

I am not a Kinect owner, I am just stating what I have seen. At 1st you said there we no enhanced core games. Then when I showed you a couple it changed to there are not very many.

My gamer tag is provided in my profile. If you glance at my games played you can tell pretty quickly what type of gamer I am in regards of the xbox 360.

Like I said I never said the enhancements were worth anything. Just the simple fact that they exist. Nice debate though. You seem to know what you are talking about. Bubbles have been depleted.

Have a good day and happy gaming.

Rated E For Everyone

Denethor_II1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

"Kinect next gen too as it will have the device out of the box which means everything will be made around Kinect and xbox live"

Whoaaa, hold it there cheese tits. No, I disagree, everything will not be made around Kinect. Games made from the ground up would most likely have to be XBox exclusive, and as we all know these are few and far between.
I think the case will more likely be an all in one console experience for all gamers.

mcstorm1548d ago

LOL loves the hate for Kinect on here. If you don't like it fine go and play on what ever you like to play on.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1548d ago
asmith23061548d ago

For me it doesn't matter how powerful the console is. If they continue down the casual road then whats the point? Im all about the content, not the specs. Im far more optimistic for Sony's next console given the first party studios they have. The WiiU looks decent as well but I want to see more. I lost faith in Microsoft around the time Gears 2 was released. Their 'vision' has been downhill since then.

Imalwaysright1548d ago

Im in the same position. I dont care about kinect, i wont buy a console for multiplatforms and i will definitely not be shelling out € 400 to play 2 or 3 games with the only thing to look forward being the eventual sequels of those 3 games. MS really dropped the ball and unless they start acquiring 1st party developers that make what i consider proper games, not that kinect crappola, then they wont be seeing my money.

catguykyou1548d ago

It's funny to me how things change each generation. When the PS1 and PS2 were out, the system was known for the best 3rd party lineup. Now the people who praise the console want to ignore how important 3rd party games are to a console. Even the multiplatform ones are important.
I hope that Sony continues to have great 1st party games, but I hope they don't do anything that causes them to lose 3rd party support. An easier development platform would very much help that and that is what it sounds like they are opting for.

mcstorm1548d ago

Catguykyou well said ive been saying this for a long time. Alot of people saw games like mgs final fantasy crash ect as a playstation exclusive and yes it kind of was because of the sales of the n64 gamecube dreamcast xbox ect but if people look back at games like tomb raider wipeout they were on the Saturn before the psx.

There are only a few exclusive games that are big and only a small number for sony and microsoft. Sony has gt and uc. Microsoft has halo and gears. Nintendo has the most but this is becasue when the n64 was out it was dropped by some big names and it was the same with the gamecube so nintendo got along with just its exclusives and look back through the n64 and gamecube history to see which games sold the most then look through sonys and you will see it was the 3rd party that drove sonys sales but people did not think of them as 3rd party as it was only on the playstation but microsoft changed this last gen and this gen.

Rainstorm811547d ago

N64? Nintendo have been doing Mario, Zelda, and Metroid since the NES days, they are staples of gaming and have proven that exclusives are key, many third party games were exclusive or at least timed on the ps1 & ps2. Exclusives matter just as much as a great lineup of multplats to define a platform

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1547d ago
Cassandra767677811548d ago SpamShow
DeadlyFire1548d ago

I am expecting 6770x2 GPU then. 1300 Gflopsx2 = 2.6 Tflops. Enough power to run that Samaritan demo at 1080p. I can't imagine the 6900 or 7900 series x2 in a console. As it would set it on fire, but I guess its possible.

I expect something in the range towards 2.5-3.0 Tflops. Maybe more if we are lucky. Would help future proof console to have more.

B00M1548d ago

I doubt two 6770's would be able to run that samaritan demo let alone at 1080p. Originally it had to be run with THREE 580's! Now I've read they can run it with one 680. Two 6770's just wouldn't be powerful enough, no way near. The two GPU rumour is probably bs. Too much heat and too power hungry for a console. Would create more problems.

SleazyChimp1547d ago

@BOOM Epic stated earlier that the Samaritan would be running on tablets and phones by 2014. Hell the Wii u will probably be able to run it by then! Also in that same article Epic stated that the real beast is Unreal 4 and that it would make the Samaritan look "Feeble".

catguykyou1546d ago

Unreal 4 engine really is leaps and bounds better looking than the Samaritan demo. When it is finally shown to the public, people will truly get an idea of what the next gen has in store.

catguykyou1546d ago

@BOOM Epic has done a lot to optimize the latest build of UE3 that was used to show off the Samaritan video. They plan to eventually have it running in flash.
The power you get out of the graphic cards on a computer is less optimized than what you get out of the same hardware on consoles because there a lot less overhead from the OS and generally more direct and often faster routes of transferring data between memory and cpu.
Anyways, you will get better performance out of 6770 on a console than you ever will out of a computer. I'm still hoping they settle on a more recent version of graphics card.

DeadlyFire1545d ago

Originally it was completely unoptimized as well. They are streamlining their engines to run on everything including flash.

Even one 6770 would be able to run this demo by those standards.

Still I prefer higher power, but heat is an issue certainly. More than likely its possible they use part of the Power7 CPU in the next Xbox as a GPU. Kinda of like what was intended with the Cell and what AMD is doing with its APU line-up of chips.

Samaritan demo is most likely the tech demo of what WiiU will be able to do at say 720p.

As for PS4/XB3. I expect much more. In time with optimization possibly WiiU to run as well, but maybe not at first. I expect UE 4.0 and CryEngine 4.0 to make a big splash when they arrive. Epic made a point of saying years ago that UE4 would be built around next generation consoles. So its very likely built to be optimized on all three upcoming consoles.

Either way optimization is key to any game engine being licensed out to developers. Its why CryEngine 2 was revamped so quickly after its launch and rebranded as CryEngine 3. PS3/X360 couldn't handle it without that optimization.

Its all still a guessing game. E3 will make me happy. As its very likely at least two consoles will have all their details fleshed out to the public. If not all three.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
chriski3331548d ago

Sony to xbox your welcome

Hanif-8761548d ago

Microsoft can keep their "always on" Xbox Next. I mean if i can't play if my internet goes down then that is reason enough for me not to ever purchase it. Also, if Sony comes up with some bullcrap like that also.. then its the same scenario.

hotrider121548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

Microsoft is not expected to announce anything pertaining to its next machine until next year 2013.

so, NINTENDO an SONY will reign this E3 then?? im sure we'll see some kind of footage of 720 and release date 2013...............
@TITANZ
"ALWAYS ON"
sound to me MICROSOFT will go Digital content only. i agree, i would'nt endorse that feature either.

vulcanproject1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

Not sure about the always on. Really wouldn't be pleased with that.

gaffyh1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

looks like its going to be $499.

But what i am worried about is how loud this things going to be to keep it cool, hopefully it isn't louder than the PS3 Slim or the Xbox 360 S

Young_ART1547d ago

now were going to start hearing from critics and xbots about how amazing blu ray is.........smh.

Septic1547d ago

No. Now we're going to start hearing from Sony fanboys about how they assume we are going to hear from MS fanboys about how amazing Blu Ray is. Smh.

fr0sty1547d ago

Dual GPUs isn't a very good idea in a console for many reasons. First of all, heat. They already had the RROD nightmare, and rumors are already coming out of heat issues with the current build of Durango.

Second, power consumption. Also, since performance doesn't scale perfectly when adding another GPU, they'd be better off just putting in a single GPU that was twice as powerful.

It's possible they could go for the GPGPU route and let the other GPU also help the CPU with things like physics or for rendering 3D without a performance hit, but none the less the idea with these consoles is to pack the most power into the fewest components so you can release a reasonably priced product that lasts a long time and isn't the size of a refrigerator. I just don't see putting 2 GPUs into a console as a good idea.

vulcanproject1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

I will address this now because i have noted others saying the same things.

Heat depends on the TDP of the chips in question. Potentially is is easier to cool two cooler chips, than a single large very hot one which may be prone to hot spot and failures. That is all about the design of the machine and its cooling system. Greater expense on the cooling solution is possible, but generally it would be cheaper to fit a better cooling system than build a very large chip with poor yields.

What is more, right up to date Nvidia and AMD have shown that the benefits of shrinking very large chips to get cost savings which is THE MAIN DRIVER of console cost reduction has nearly collapsed. Moving to a better process is closing in on being useless for saving money on making a big chip because the yields have been so poor and the wafers so expensive. http://www.extremetech.com/...

They believe as soon as 2015 it could be virtually pointless to shrink your massive chip unless something major changes.

Two smaller chips solve this very near future problem. Smaller chips would work because their yields would be vastly superior. They would be more viable for future cost savings from shrinks unlike a large chip.

Power consumption goes with the TDP. Most people don't seem to care about it a great deal. They didn't when they bought an original PS3 or 360. They don't when they buy 50 inch plasmas.

Also it is generally only high in the first model. After a die shrink power consumption reduces rapidly. With the aforementioned point that shrinking smaller chips is much more viable, they are more likely to get a shrink and save power sooner.

As for the claim that it wouldn't scale perfectly then that is incorrect. On PC then they typically can't because they rely on drivers and developers to actually bother creating their game or engine for dual GPUs and there are thousands of potential configurations of chipset and GPU and driver.

When you make a game for a set piece of hardware and use Lucid Hydra style techniques for splitting the render tasks then you can achieve near perfect scaling.

It is blatantly obvious consoles have had the attention from devs and pretty mad to think a dev would build a game for a dual GPU console and not code for both GPUs. Course they would.

Did they not transition to multicore CPUs this generation and not bother wringing out performance from every core? Whats the difference? Devs will use whatever is given them as best they can, especially on console.

TheXgamerLive1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

Both sonyand MX dont want you knowing whats coming until next year so they'll continue to throw some meaty rumors your way,
just dont drink it up liks it real.
Also, doesnt matter if BR is included next gen BR will be like this gen's DVD, bhind the times.
Games will be 10x larger just based on the engines and audio used so BR wont be able to support that.

If sony strictly went BR, then they'd be the ones behind the times, behind on the need required. 50 gigs wont be enough space after the first year of development, not even close, much less the standard 25gig.

Dual gpu's, no, however you will see dedicated cores for both built in kinect and the O.S. with additional floating cores that could be either kinect used for specific functions or games based.

The 4 to 6 cores is also "not" true. In 2010 MS was experimenting with variations based on the phenom w/12 to 16 cores. IBM as well has 2 propossed processors for the next X and I'm sure they werent 4 to 6 cores. haha.

It's great to guess and play with the possibilities but it will be later this fall even before Epic and others will know the exact specs on whats to come and that could even be tweaked last minute.

Games are being developed for both systems though and probably have been for a year but they've been on a highend pc with the knowledge that it will go to next gen. kits when they are available.

2013 christmas release? Yes, for both sony and MS. MS likes a fall september release.

Malice-Flare1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

heh, the anti-used game rumors seem to be consistent for both PS4 and nextBox that each has an implementation of not-ideal DRM. time to invest on the Wii-U and an upgraded PC...

mugoldeneagle031547d ago

Is this whole Kinect-built in thing. I mean, there's no way (I guess maybe there is ) they'll be able to fit a big enough camera into the system, capable of zooming in or capturing movements from a distance

And unless they go pretty different in terms of design of the 360, how else can you really have it built in?

I for one have all of my consoles sitting in an entertainment system next to my DVR, Blu Ray player etc...

Can someone explain how this might work?

Angels37851547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

I agreed with EVERY SINGLE SCENTENCE......until I read the end and realized you were a complete and total fanboy. FORZA??????? Number on franchise in pro racing Sims? Lolololololololol. That game is the farthest thing from real as they come, granted its fun and in my opinion more fun than gt5, but it sells like crap in comparison and in realism. In terms of the look and feel of the car its gt5 all the way. For example I drive a Mazda rx8, and I have personally taken it to its top speed of 155mph, in Forza apparently it can reach 185mph and still corner like pacman. And its not just this car, like the Nissan gtr has a top speed of 195 and in forza it reaches nearly 230.....that's obsurd. Plus forzas tracks are wider than the real ones and the cars handle like they are remote controlled. Its quite good fun, but not in any way realistic. Forza also hails in comparison to how well the gt series displays cars, forza does it magically, but gt.....its almost poetic. Plus gt has assosiations with REAL Car companies and the Dev team even helped design REAL cars that made it to production, like the citrogen gt, and even the Nissan GTR speed interface was made by the gt Dev team......plus the x1 concept car which has real world physics applied with real race drivers at red bull technologies putting input and pushing its production. Forza has nothing to show for any of this, its just a super fun addicting racer, but not a better simulator. Unfortunately thats why forza is better as a GAMING racer....its fun. GT is not for every one if you aren't willing to invest a good two hours on a single race that you probably wont win, its not the game for you. Thats one of the reasons it got marked down (aside from no real damage until you completely max out the games leveling system) its too hard and not as fun as a game should be. Sure damage may not make it a realistic, but I'm pretty sure most drivers dont get into accidents every five seconds in real life and drift at the turn of a joystick like in forza. Driving is all about the looks and feel of the Car and That is something that Forza hasn't been able to touch in GT (aside from the standard cars)......here are some links for proof......
http://www.youtube.com/watc... go to 5:29 to hear about how the gt dev helped on this amazing nissan GTR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... Here is the Citrogen GT made exclusively for GT5 and now a real production car
http://www.youtube.com/watc... here is Sebastion Vettel playing the game and explaining that it is the most realistic thing he's played. Many drivers use GT as a test simulator.

Outside_ofthe_Box1547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

.

I felt the same way. I agreed with everything LX said until the last two sentences...

GT hands down is the #1 and best racing sim franchise period.

Angels37851547d ago (Edited 1547d ago )

LOL thats what Im trying to prove and identify; the difference of a SIMULATOR and a Racing game. That is probably the sole reason he has so many disagrees, it was a stupid ignorant statement. Plus just the way GT portrays itself is a borderline religious effort I mean look at this http://www.youtube.com/watc...
The way they do this is astounding and poetic. I never though I could be in more love with cars after that. Hell GT even made me change my major from computer engineering to automotive engineering! The sound track is also very catchy:)
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Septic1547d ago

Paragraphs. Where art thou??!!!

PiperMCFierceson1547d ago SpamShow
Legion1547d ago

"Xbox 720 will require an always-on internet connection as an anti-piracy measure." I call bull on this statement. This immediately alienates those that players that don't play online and thus greatly reduces their sales possibilities. This change alone would ensure that if PS3 allows games to be played without internet connection it will own MS on consoles sold from day one almost. Way too many gamers that don't connect to the internet for this to be viable.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
Titanz1548d ago (Edited 1548d ago )

"Always on" is a feature I wouldn't endorse.

@Perjoss

Nintendo has an, "always on" feature for the Wii, though it isn't "mandatory" (Its called "Wiiconnect 24" - which allows the player to receive updates, friends message, etc. <just as long as the yellow light in on>).

Maybe it'll workout for Microsoft, so here's hoping for the best.