- Joined
- Jul 5, 2017
- Messages
- 13,139
- Reaction score
- 21,131
Bruh I finished 6 seasons of NBA 2k14 without simulating a game in career mode. I was playing like 15 hours a day on my work holidays in the middle of summer.
Xbox Official Xbox thread
- Thread starter Vulcan
- Start date
Bruh I finished 6 seasons of NBA 2k14 without simulating a game in career mode. I was playing like 15 hours a day on my work holidays in the middle of summer.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
Seconded here. This was a gamer house. The 360's that were in it were practically never off except during the NBA season when the guys spent all night watching games. 14+ hours days were otherwise routine year round. And this was in Chico, CA, where the peak summer weeks always break 100F, and sometimes 110F.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2018
- Messages
- 2,503
- Reaction score
- 534
I don’t know where this overheating thing came from I’ve never heard of it or experienced it. I’d tell you how long some of my weekend gaming sessions last but I’d be embarrassed and let me put it this way, I can’t imagine anyone could stress an Xbox to the point of a fire or disc melting unless it’s already inhumanly hot outside and they wrapped it in plastic.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2017
- Messages
- 13,139
- Reaction score
- 21,131
Fire can happen with any electrical product. But melting disks? seems fake.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,952
- Reaction score
- 26,191
The Air Force had a massive PS3 cluster.
PS2's had a problem (blue light of death) with the laser burning out.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 15,691
- Reaction score
- 2,163
Microsoft seems so lost with this shit. First they make a statement saying something like the name of the new Xbox will tell us exactly its purpose (which I took as akin to the Switch). Then they announce the Xbox series X which doesn't tell me anything about its purpose. Then they immediately backpedal and say it's just the Xbox. I honestly think they don't know what the fuck they are doing and it's going to cause a lot of confusion when this thing comes out
Xbox One which is stupid enough
Xbox One S
Xbox One X
Xbox One S AD
Xbox Series X
Xbox Series S (presumably)
Xbox One which is stupid enough
Xbox One S
Xbox One X
Xbox One S AD
Xbox Series X
Xbox Series S (presumably)
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
No, they've already confirmed @Dizzy's expectation with a separate announcement. They clarified there will be no more "S" units or anything like that. They will all be "Xbox Series X". So it sounds like they're just going to number them. XSX, XSX2, etc.
I like that more than all the dumb "S" nonsense.
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 15,691
- Reaction score
- 2,163
So this will be the series X and the next gen will be the X2 or just the next iteration?
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
Well, fuck, I don't know. I went to find that specific article I'd seen in my feed yesterday, and looking at all the comments (including from the likes of Phil Spencer) in my quest to find it, it's still not entirely clear. Microsoft does suck at this. You're not wrong about that.
But they wanted to make it clear it is the "Series X", so that they can add "descriptors" when they need them for subsequent releases. The marketing idea they're really trying to push here is that it's just the "Xbox" and any descriptors thereafter are inconsequential to anything but a particular revision's specific specs.
Ergo, they seek to end the idea of generations of consoles altogether.
That's what they're trying to tell us with the naming scheme. They're just the worst communicators imaginable. This is why they continue to emphasize it will have 100% backwards compatibility with the Xbox One, and eventually also the Xbox 360 and Xbox, apparently, or at least they're trying for that. You can see why this irritates guys like Linus with his PC sensibilities. Microsoft wants the public to stop thinking in terms of restrictions on games, and just think of every Xbox as capable of accessing the entire historical (and future!) Xbox library. Then it's just a matter of how well that particular unit can handle which games.
It's a radical shift in console strategy, and it's obviously one that Sony isn't keen to pursue themselves with their massive market share advantage.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 52,954
- Reaction score
- 16,718
I wonder how this would affect game devs. If there are no more new generations when do game devs decide to cut out the older consoles and only focus on the newer ones. When devs make that choice how do they inform the consumer. Could get really confusing for everyone involved.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2015
- Messages
- 24,331
- Reaction score
- 37,192
The naming is as dumb as Battlefield 1.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
Indeed. This is why PC gamers have resources like "Can I Run It?" and Game Debate's website.
The key advantage here is the incredibly limited number of Xbox consoles. They're even more streamlined than iPhones. Going forward, it wouldn't be hard, if they maintain a sequential naming scheme with all new Xboxes, but they don't seem to want to commit to that, and it doesn't address past consoles. So I'm thinking a grading system makes sense. Xbox is a "1". Xbox 360 is a "2". Xbox One and Xbox One S are a "3". Xbox One X is a "4". Xbox Series X first console is a "5". Game developers who make games, and don't want to spend time nerfing them for past systems, can rate their game. This is a "3+" game, for example, so you need an Xbox One or later to play it. That's simple enough for the general public to handle.
Of course, I doubt they are that keen to spend time on support for past consoles. It makes more sense that they implement this grading system starting with the Xbox Series X, and thereafter. Don't worry about supporting games for Xbox consoles that came before. Backwards compatibility is enough for those.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 52,954
- Reaction score
- 16,718
This is pretty much a long the lines of what I was thinking but you've made it even simpler than what I had it mind. Next gen should be pretty interesting if this is what MS has planned. I wonder if Sony will counter or just stick with the PS4\Pro combination then move on to next gen.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
Leaked GPU Specs Suggest Xbox Series X Substantially More Powerful Than PS5
Extremetech & Eurogamer said:Eurogamer has gotten their hands on some leak data they feel is fairly legit, and the website’s track record with this kind of information is solid. There have been some rumored APU configurations that leaked earlier this year, but this new data implies the Sony PS5 will feature 36 GPU clusters clocked at up to 2GHz...
As for the Xbox Series X, Eurogamer is implying this console packs serious firepower. Here’s the rumored configuration:
If this rumor proves true — always something to keep in mind — the Xbox Series X will launch packing the equivalent of a high-end PC GPU. The largest GPU AMD has ever built are cards like the R9 Fury X and Vega 64, with 4096 cores. A 56-cluster Navi GPU would pack 1.4x more GPU cores than the 5700 XT, which already competes in the high-end PC GPU segment at the ~$400 price point. While AMD is expected to launch Navi 20 before the Xbox Series X debuts, we haven’t seen any indication that the company intends to dramatically expand the number of GPU cores it offers — Navi improved on GCN’s performance by making the individual cores more efficient as opposed to simply throwing more cores at the problem. It’s highly unlikely, in other words, that AMD would build a 56 CU for Microsoft and then ship a 128 CU design into the PC market.
If this rumor proves true, Microsoft is playing a far more aggressive game than it did last generation. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that AMD ships an 80 CU version of Navi 20, which comes out to 2x Navi 10. That would give the Xbox Series X 3,584 GPU cores compared to 5,120 for Navi 20, or about 70 percent as many.
In 2013, the Xbox One shipped with 768 GPU cores. The month before, AMD had shipped the R9 290X, with 2,816 cores. The PS4, at debut, had 1,152 cores. The Xbox had 27 percent as many GPU cores as the R9 290X, while the PS4 had 41 percent. While we can’t draw linear comparisons between console and PC performance strictly on the basis of GPU core count, the PC GPU was obviously far larger, with significantly more compute and graphics resources...
It’s also possible Microsoft decided to pull out all the stops after the disaster of the Xbox One. Doubling down on beating Sony in raw performance from Day 1 might represent Microsoft’s big idea for preventing a repeat of what happened last generation.
If the Xbox rumors are accurate there doesn’t seem to be a way for MS to sell the console at $400 without losing money — and I’ve got doubts about $500 as well, given that the system is expected to also use a high-speed NVMe-attached SSD and GDDR6. Hard drives might be slow, but they’re still cheaper than the equivalent amount of solid state storage. That doesn’t mean MS can’t pursue a loss-making strategy, but both MS and Sony opted not to do that with the initial Xbox One / PS4 after taking heavier-than-expected losses on X360 and PS3 (particularly in Sony’s case).
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2015
- Messages
- 24,331
- Reaction score
- 37,192
Curious about pricing. Either this thing will be expensive af, or they’ll sell it at a loss. If they sell it at a loss I wonder if they’ll dramatically increase the price on game pass or whatever it’s called, because right now I don’t see how they make much money off of that service considering that absurd promotion for that they had a few months ago.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2010
- Messages
- 80,738
- Reaction score
- 67,755
Oh'...that is the plan. Make no mistake. We'll all look back at this "golden age" where services like "Game Pass", were $15 a month. The bronze(indies), silver(indies + a few AAA), and gold(everything) plans are coming, if it takes off and becomes the norm. Which it will.
Once physical media is dead, and there is no other option, they could easily sell gamers on a $40-$50 monthly plan. It's still cheaper than buying three games a month, right?
This is where the industry is headed.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,472
- Reaction score
- 38,216
Looks more like ~33%.
That's the amount that tends to separate the highest end tier of performance in PC processing components from the mid-tier range of components, but in the grand scheme of things, at this stage, that certainly isn't enormous or anything. In the long term it certainly doesn't seem that significant. However, since the new battle appears to be a console revision every ~3 years or so, it could give the Xbox an appreciable advantage until the next revision repeats.
I fear so.
You already see Apple stock skyrocketing despite diminishing revenues simply because investors like the uptick on "services". Services, services, services.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2004
- Messages
- 169,423
- Reaction score
- 156,083
Yep...
they really landed a knockout blow on everyone by basically giving gears 5 away. They gonna need something bigger and better to stay ahead,cos everyone else is looking for a move like that
