If that were the case xbox original would have disabled xbox live right after the original xbox came out, because alot of the games like Halo 2 for example ran differently on the xbox 360. It looked and played better because the game automatically used the better hardware available to it. (I think it had to be updated first, I don’t remember much)
I groaned and stopped reading after this.
why?
Do I really have to explain to you why?
I’ll explain: It’s because you’re completely incorrect. The point of a console is, as Maxey said, that everyone is running exactly the same hardware. It makes it easy for game developers to optimize their games, because then they can be sure that everyone who has their console is going to be able to run their game.
Also, consoles occupy a slightly different gaming niche than PCs do: with a console, it’s really easy to invite a few friends over, plug in some extra controllers, and play games together. You can do the same thing with a PC, but there are a lot of hoops to jump through first.
no…
Edit: the console is still running 99% of the same hardware, they just altered one chip and some coding. It’s not like they made a whole new console.
Yes.
Nintendo and Sony have both done this many times before Microsoft did.
Yes, and the only difference was 1280x720 (with some graphical bugs) vs 640x480. (with no problems because of different hardware)
The only reason the PSP got away with more RAM when it got updated was because it was only (officially) used to lessen load times from discs.
I get it, but the extra 512MB is nothing but an add on and should be treated as such, just like the Kinect, not all games require Kinect. Same thing with the 1GB RAM all games can ignore it in the development, and should develop directly for the regular 512MB, then if they decide that they want to add some features or optimize for the 1GB they can add it in an update.
I’m not a part of the whole “add some RAM” debate (although, the 360 had 512MB? that’s funny). I’m just railing against your “consoles are for people who are too stupid to build PCs” statement.
MDIGN, it’ll probably end up being like the Kinect and Nintendo’s RAM upgrade for the N64: games made for it won’t work without it, with a few games (very few) being able to use it to a limited extent if you have it.
It’s not a bad idea, but when the console is coming close to being replaced it’s not the best move to put time and money into developing a system for it that’ll be replaced within 1.5-2 years.
BSCLY this.
PC elitism is so 2007.
Yep, and I am mad at them too, which is why I wait a year or so before getting a console, it’s a scheme and they almost always come out with a slimmer version.
Yeah, that’s what i’m talking about. It improved the performance even if it was only load times. I’m pretty sure everyone would rather have a slim that also lessens load times instead of just a slim.
Besides, it’s a measly extra 512MBs of RAM. I see the PS3 has alot of good hardware that could make it better than the Xbox, but the devs are too lazy and are bottle-necking it’s performance so it’s pretty much the same console other than the blu-ray.
Edit: oops, my bad I wasn’t trying to be a PC eliteist, just some people at school got into my head recently.
As long as the next Xbox can run all 360 titles at full 1080p with at least 8xMSAA than It should be good enough. I mean that’s the main gripe against the more recent console games. There aren’t many complaints about bad graphics or anything unless a game looks absolutely ghastly, it’s mostly all about sub HD resolutions and no AA.
Honestly I don’t really have any complaints about the current console games graphically. In fact, I’m still surprised by what’s able to be done on consoles with every release. I’d have never thought something like Gears of War 3 or Crysis 2 was possible on the 360. I’d have never thought the gigantic map sizes of Halo Reach or Battlefield 3 would have worked on a 360. I mean, we’re talking about the next gen of the console, and the current one is still proving pretty damn powerful despite it’s shortcomings. If anything, it makes me look forward to the last quarter of the lives of the NEXT gen. That will be fuckin crazy.
That’s why I believe Xbox live needs to be overhauled because it fucking sucks. Not as bad as PSN, but still pretty bad.
This is because of the great dedication and optimizing that developers are doing for the console games, but they are pushing it’s limits, I see drops in fps on a few games from time to time. the 1GB would serve as a fix for that and an fps booster alone even though the game will be made for the 512MB
You’d still alienate a huge userbase with that.
How so, it’s kind of like DLC except instead of adding content it makes the game soother. Like the 512 gets the base game, and 1GB gets that and some extras; so it’s actually more like a ‘Limited edition’ vs a 'standard copy. They both still play the same games and get the same updates, one just looks better than the other and it’s usually worth dishing out the extra bucks.
Perfect Dark did that on the N64, except for almost 85% of the game was completely inaccessible without the Expansion Pak.
I’d rather have MS completely focused on properly stress testing the components of the next xbox than waste time on an unnecessary ram upgrade for the 360.
yes, but they programmed it as a requirement. What I’m saying is like flipping over what you said so that extra 10% (the HD/ RAM sucking parts) is inaccessible due to obvious and impossible to bypass hardware limits while the 100% of the game which is the base game how it was meant to be played and what not. They could also add VRAM to the Xbox in an update to help those out who haven’t upgraded.
EDIT: @Maxey: I’m not saying now although VRAM is still possible, but I’m saying tht they could have and should have worked this out before they released the Xbox Slim