Microsoft begins work on the Xbox 720

profitius

About time. Theres plenty of things developers can't do with current generation consoles and they're also 5 years old now.

There has long been speculation about when Microsoft is going to release the next-gen Xbox (and Sony the PS4).

But it seems that in the case of MS, the Xbox 720, as many have dubbed it, may actually be sketched out on a drawing board somewhere.

Yesterday, CVG spotted Microsoft job listings for a number of positions, including a Hardware Verification Engineer and a VLSI Graphics Architect to work on a potential Xbox 360 successor.

Here’s the description (on LinkedIn) for the Hardware Engineer: “Do you have a passion for leading edge technology? Are you fascinated by the video game industry and Xbox 360? Come join a dynamic engineering team and play a key role in the development and verification of the Xbox and future platforms.”

“We are looking for an experienced Senior Hardware Design/Verification Engineer. You will be responsible for the design verification and qualification of the Xbox console at the component, motherboard, and system levels.”

Of course, this is just the start of the process, and the Xbox 720 could be a long way off yet.

Microsoft has treated the release of Kinect as more than a shot-in-the-arm for the current Xbox, and built the launch up almost as if it was a new console itself. It’s their hope that the motion controller will keep the X360 fresh for a few years yet, and we’d expect the next-gen consoles won’t be arriving for another three or maybe four years.

Kinect has certainly got off to a good enough start. It shifted 8 million units in its first three months, 3 million more than Microsoft’s target. That’s the numbers shipped to retailers, mind, although analysts estimate over 6 million of those have been sold on to consumers.

http://www.techwatch.co.uk/2011/03/08/microsoft-begins-work-on-the-xbox-720/

ShadowHearth

Is it 5 years allready?! I only get a kic of it now!!! I bet it will be anather 2-3 years untill we will see specs and partly working model....

smk89

profitius wrote: »

About time. Theres plenty of things developers can't do with current generation consoles and they're also 5 years old now.

Do you think that spending an extra ~€500 is going to improve anything other than visuals? They're pretty good already and plateauing to be honest. Good gaming is more than looks.

But hey onwards and upwards. Excelsior!!

ShadowHearth

I dont know.. I am pc gamer, so I played alot of pc versions ofoust popular game. When I was ordering bc2, I expected it to be.... Really **** looking, but I was nicely surprised. It was really decent! More power is okay ofc, but I bet they can have atleast 2-3 years with this xbox.

A bit off topic, but killzone 3 only now using full power of ps3. So xbox would not be far away of it.

profitius

smk89 wrote: »

Do you think that spending an extra ~€500 is going to improve anything other than visuals? They're pretty good already and plateauing to be honest. Good gaming is more than looks.

But hey onwards and upwards. Excelsior!!

Its not just visuals. Its game play too. Developers could be able to do more things and I'd expect new types of games to be developed. For instance grand theft auto on the next generation console would have more people with much better AI, maybe some animals introduced, the cars would be more realistic when getting damaged etc, better physics and higher frame rate and it would look fantastic too.

Personally I think 5 years is enough for a console. The main reason they might be holding off for another few years is because of next generation computer chips. I know some are in development like the memristor chip and a few others.

Syferus

Not 'about time', not even close.

A grand total of zero developers publishers relish or even want another reset of tech and a huge addition to the already spiraling development costs on home consoles. Move and Kinnect highlight how similar the console manufacturers' mindsets are.

The longer this generation lasts the better it is for everyone, unless developer bankruptcy is your thing.

Nollog

Syferus wrote: »

A grand total of zero developers publishers relish or even want another reset of tech and a huge addition to the already spiraling development costs on home consoles.

Not 'about time', not even close.

Then why do EA, THQ and Activision keep saying they need a new console?
New hardware means everyone wants to buy their games again.

Syferus

/\/ollog wrote: »

Then why do EA, THQ and Activision keep saying they need a new console?
New hardware means everyone wants to buy their games again.

No. A new console decreases your audience from 40 million units to a couple million. Excitement has never bested the raw ecnomics of the huge increase in cost invovled in developing for a new console. It took a good few cycles before either HD system was a completely viable entity for a third party. The prevailing sense in the industry, admidst a recession and multiple closures and mergers, is one of conservationism.

Sticky_Fingers

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Is it 5 years allready?! I only get a kic of it now!!! I bet it will be anather 2-3 years untill we will see specs and partly working model....

Going by MS previous form and the RROD fiasco I'd say they would consider good enough to ship.

Lets just hope they actually spend the time and effort making sure the bloody thing works this time instead of halfassing in an attempt to get one over on Sony and the PS4.

profitius

Syferus wrote: »

No. A new console decreases your audience from 40 million units to a couple million. The pervaileny sense in the industry, admidst a recession and multiple closures and mergers, is one of conservationism.

Its not like they'll suddenly stop making games for the current generation. They'll continue on as normal and start making next gen games too. All consoles starting off have a smaller base of owners but they eventually grow. As the xbox 360 profits start to dry up it'll be because people are buying for thier xbox 720. A no lose situation for developers really.

However, there are some compelling arguments as to why Microsoft should be considering an upgrade. "There are developers out there who are keen to get their teeth into new hardware," says Ingham. "There was an interesting quote from Cevat Yerli, the boss of Crytek, who said that the console market has remained static for so long that the high-end PCs are effectively a generation ahead in terms of hardware. So it's little wonder that some teams are getting slightly restless. The in-house studios, especially, are probably thinking, 'we're sick of the same old hardware, we want something new'."

Developer pester power should not be overlooked here. It's crucial to the console manufacturers to have the best studios onside, and the best studios tend to be the ones with incredibly bright, ambitious coders who want to try themselves against bleeding edge hardware. Sony famously toured the world's most talented development houses in 1994 taking its PlayStation demos with it – the company knew it had to get the dev community interested before even thinking about consumers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2011/mar/09/wii2-xbox720-console-rumours

Syferus

profitius wrote: »

Its not like they'll suddenly stop making games for the current generation. They'll continue on as normal and start making next gen games too. All consoles starting off have a smaller base of owners but they eventually grow. As the xbox 360 profits start to dry up it'll be because people are buying for thier xbox 720. A no lose situation for developers really.

A huge outlay by a manufacturer and a developer (who'll has to start development on the first few cycles games long before a console is released and a known success) is hardly no lose. In theory that idea has always been attractive but the records of how most consoles were supported by major players after its successor was release doesn't make for pretty reading.

Crytek are hardly a good source for level-headed commentary on technology or within-means development, I should add. They're heavily vested in bleeding edge technology and they're far from being in a good financial position.

The ultimate point is, as the first article says, the next generation is about three or four years off, and for very good reason.

Retr0gamer

Far too early to move at the moment imo.

New stupidly expensive console and developers and shops hiking game prices back up to 80 euros doesn't sound much fun to me.

Fnz

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Far too early to move at the moment imo.

... but hardly too early to plan.

DARK-KNIGHT

after spending a fortune on a new slim 250 then buying stand alone kinect 150 and the 50 odd games i have with tritton headset 200 euro fightstick 170 euro and they talk about a new console???

i say F U C K you ms if you do it this early im buying a gaming pc once and for all i swear

profitius

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

after spending a fortune on a new slim 250 then buying stand alone kinect 150 and the 50 odd games i have with tritton headset 200 euro fightstick 170 euro and they talk about a new console???

i say F U C K you ms if you do it this early im buying a gaming pc once and for all i swear

Nobody is forcing people to stop playing their xbox.

krudler

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

after spending a fortune on a new slim 250 then buying stand alone kinect 150 and the 50 odd games i have with tritton headset 200 euro fightstick 170 euro and they talk about a new console???

i say F U C K you ms if you do it this early im buying a gaming pc once and for all i swear

but then you'd have to upgrade it every few years anyway, I doubt a pc built 5 years ago will run Crysis 2 at full spec, consoles will play anything thats made for them.

2-3 years more is plenty of time to still push the tech with current consoles, look at the PS2, the best games visually, God Of War 2, GT4, DMC3, MGS3 etc etc only came out in 2005 onwards, that was 5 years after the consoles launch and they were only pushing it to its limits then.
Nobody complained when the PS3 came out 6 years after the PS2, which came about 6 years after the PS1. The original xbox came out in what, 2001? 360 in 2005, and whatever the new one is called in 2013? thats plenty of time between them to be fair.

Fnz

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

i say F U C K you ms if you do it this early im buying a gaming pc once and for all i swear

Not to dissuade you from 'going PC', but MS usually profit from that too.

DARK-KNIGHT

krudler wrote: »

but then you'd have to upgrade it every few years anyway, I doubt a pc built 5 years ago will run Crysis 2 at full spec, consoles will play anything thats made for them.

2-3 years more is plenty of time to still push the tech with current consoles, look at the PS2, the best games visually, God Of War 2, GT4, DMC3, MGS3 etc etc only came out in 2005 onwards, that was 5 years after the consoles launch and they were only pushing it to its limits then.
Nobody complained when the PS3 came out 6 years after the PS2, which came about 6 years after the PS1. The original xbox came out in what, 2001? 360 in 2005, and whatever the new one is called in 2013? thats plenty of time between them to be fair.

But ps2 was limited when ps3 was released? The xbox has plenty left to go IMO maybe I'm wrong or the heartache of my beloved 360 being obsolete hurts me like a bitch lol it's too soon ms I have about 11 games to get through first lol

DARK-KNIGHT

I just think ms owe us over rrod and quick releasing the 360 surely they won't make same mistakes???

Fnz

krudler wrote: »

but then you'd have to upgrade it every few years anyway, I doubt a pc built 5 years ago will run Crysis 2 at full spec, consoles will play anything thats made for them.

That's a specious comparison, and leads to:

- the graphical fidelity argument
- pricing of the full gaming setup
- Cost of content and cross-generational compatibility
- open vs. closed system

Tea_Bag

i for one welcome next gen consoles. most games coming out on the PC are ports from the 360/PS3, and dont even use a quarter of the brute power of my PC.
a better xbox will mean better quality ports for PC gamers.

btw, i play on a 360 and PC regurarly. i also have a PS3 that hasnt been turned on in months.

Magill

Tea_Bag wrote: »

i for one welcome next gen consoles. most games coming out on the PC are ports from the 360/PS3, and dont even use a quarter of the brute power of my PC.
a better xbox will mean better quality ports for PC gamers.

btw, i play on a 360 and PC regurarly. i also have a PS3 that hasnt been turned on in months.

The thing is... developers arent really pushing the current gen to their limits, so its not really down to the lack of power on the consoles. Maybe developers are just being lazy or more than likely PC hardware is just too far ahead.


Also 3/4 years is a long time, so it dont think it'll be too soon to be bring out a new gen of consoles.

ShadowHearth

profitius wrote: »

Its not like they'll suddenly stop making games for the current generation. They'll continue on as normal and start making next gen games too. All consoles starting off have a smaller base of owners but they eventually grow. As the xbox 360 profits start to dry up it'll be because people are buying for thier xbox 720. A no lose situation for developers really.

As soon as mew console will be out, you can forget about games for 360 etc. It happened to original xbox and ps2. All just jumped on new hardware. Itvwill be same story, and I wount blame them.... What is better? Making games for future console which will have a life spam of anather 6 years? Or make games on platform which is outdated.

Trust me, as soon as new generation will come out, you, me, all boards.ie all Ireland, Europe etc, will forget about 360.

Magill

ShadowHearth wrote: »

As soon as mew console will be out, you can forget about games for 360 etc. It happened to original xbox and ps2. All just jumped on new hardware. Itvwill be same story, and I wount blame them.... What is better? Making games for future console which will have a life spam of anather 6 years? Or make games on platform which is outdated.

Trust me, as soon as new generation will come out, you, me, all boards.ie all Ireland, Europe etc, will forget about 360.

Not true at all.... the PS2 was still having games released on it years after PS3 release, same with the PS1 -> PS2. Not everyone can afford a 600 pound console on release...

cython

Just so people are aware, there is an earlier thread over in the xbox forum dealing with much the same subject. I know they are in different forums at the moment, but maybe a merge is in order?

richymcdermott

Knowing Sony they will stick to there ten year plan , this topic has been brought up before and they said there gonna stick with the ps3 and still bring new titles to the platform. i cant see why the wii would bring out a new console when its selling well already, and for xbox theyll prob make a jump early like the did with the 360 though in fairness i dont see the point , better graphics thats it really. they wanna stick bringing new core games to the community than sending them indie games and kinetic stuff

ghostchant

In the past the console cycle was like clockwork, you could bet your house on a new generation every X years. I think the plateau we've hit is a great thing for everyone - the longer console lifespan means that:

- developers can use the skill-sets they've built up working on the consoles for a few more years with the chance of a reasonable sales return

- customers get more value for money out of their large initial investment in the consoles

- customers will actually be able to find the games that come out for the console at this point (normally when the best games get released, mainly due to the first point above), since they're not relegated to single copies sitting on shelves on gamestop etc, surrounded by xbox1080/PS9 etc launch titles (which, due to the launch-window rush and the lack of dev experience, won't actually look significantly better than the last gen and will likely play worse)

amacachi

ghostchant wrote: »

In the past the console cycle was like clockwork, you could bet your house on a new generation every X years. I think the plateau we've hit is a great thing for everyone - the longer console lifespan means that:

Was it? One thing I've noticed reading back is a lot of overlap and some very short and very long gaps depending on manufacturer. Or are you just talking about the 2 previous generations? :pac:

ghostchant

Of course there's always been overlap of generations. The ps2 is still in production for instance, so that generation isn't over technically. I'm not paying attention to that though, the way I personally think of it is that when a new 'gen' is launched, the one before it comes to a grinding halt, at least in terms of media coverage and shelf space. Remembering back to when the PS1 was released, I recall that I could no longer find anything in (multiformat) games magazines about the SNES, MD etc. (I read games magazines the generation before but I was a bit too young to notice the switch from 'old to new' in that case, or I was just blinded by excitement about the SNES.)

Walk into a game shop now and try to find the new ps2 releases, or look at the already rapidly diminishing shelf space the DS has as the 3DS cogs start to turn

ranopano

It's no coincidence that launch titles are terrible or boring games.

It takes a long time for developers to come to grips with a new console. OK, it took longer with the PS3 because of Sony messing about, but it still takes time.

So with a new console, the cost of making a game goes up. Developers take less risks and bang out Call of Duty Modern Warfare 38, Need for Speed Shift Unleashed Fast Car Game 84. And they might look a little prettier but so what?

The guy who said the next GTA would have a lot of extra stuff like animals and realistic damage on a next generation console, yeah it might. But if the PS4 came out, you'd see a new GTA game, cause it's guaranteed sales. You wouldn't see Rockstar taking a chance like with RDR and now L.A. Noire. It's only well into a console lifespan that thing's like that happen. Yeah it was 5-6 years from the PS1 to the PS2, but that doesn't mean it always has to be the same lifespan. The cycle will and should keep getting bigger.


A 10 year cycle makes sense to everyone. It was different with the PS1-PS2 and Xbox-Xbox 360 jump. Except for insanely realistic graphics developers can do nearly everything they can think of with this generation. So costs go down, more risks, better games. And don't forget the well established and incredible multiplayer networks set up for the current generation.

a better xbox will mean better quality ports for PC gamers.

I can see your point. But it will mean games with better graphics, and less of them. Not better games. I can relate to what you mean, you've got a deadly PC and you want amazing looking demanding games on it, but you're in the minority at the moment.

Magill wrote: »

Not true at all.... the PS2 was still having games released on it years after PS3 release, same with the PS1 -> PS2. Not everyone can afford a 600 pound console on release...

Well they release a new generation with the thinking that enough people can. Sony and Microsoft aren't on some crusade to further games technology. PS2 games still came out after the PS3, but they were ****ty PS2 ports or kids games weren't they?

TheDoc

I don't think you will see this for the next 5-8 years, easily.

There is alot of big plans for Kinect and the current generation hsa plenty of life left in it.

Not expecting anything for the next few years.