Leaked (56 page) doc on future XBOX plans? Removed by MS lawyers

If this is real maybe the WiiU is saved in terms of third party support because durango is not a giant step forward in terms of power.

No, it's absolutely not "old prototype specs", it's freaking totally fake. This is probably a college assignment of some sort. Just stop. It's absolutely fake. famicommander

Could be. Doesn't matter much either way.

Unfortunately for "hardcore" Xbox fans, most of what it details is probably real.

Those glasses are actually a projector. Here is the patent. http://www.patentbolt.com/2012/03/microsoft-invents-projector-eyewear-for-xbox-beyond.html

56 fake pages?campzor

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

[QUOTE="campzor"]56 fake pages?loosingENDS

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

[QUOTE="campzor"]56 fake pages?loosingENDS

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

[QUOTE="XenoNinja"]No way could something like that be worth so little.reach3

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="campzor"]56 fake pages?JFetch

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="campzor"]56 fake pages?reach3

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

That is easy

Custom 8000 based series (medium to high end part) GPU, DX11 etc

5-6 Core CPU, 3Ghz

2-4GB RAM

16MB EDRAM

and launch at 400$ without Kinect, like xbox 360

[QUOTE="reach3"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

loosingENDS

That is easy

Custom 8000 based series (medium to high end part) GPU, DX11 etc

5-6 Core CPU, 3Ghz

2-4GB RAM

16MB EDRAM

and launch at 400$ without Kinect, like xbox 360

The EDRAM would be a bottleneck for the console if those specs were true.

[QUOTE="JFetch"][QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

To make it more believable of course

Kinect already tracks 4 people BTW and there is no mention of smart glass

As for the 299$ price with Kinect 2, LOL

famicommander

I think it's more plausible that MS would go with a weaker 6670-level GPU and fully integrate Kinect into the Xbox experience, rather than go with a decent GPU. Kinect and Live are going to be everything to them. Poor strategy to sell it seperately. Having a contract-based option and Kinect included isn't out of the question.

I think it's more plausible that MS would go with a weaker 6670-level GPU and fully integrate Kinect into the Xbox experience, rather than go with a decent GPU. Kinect and Live are going to be everything to them. Poor strategy to sell it seperately. Having a contract-based option and Kinect included isn't out of the question.

gamecubepad

6670?

Sure, if they plan to release at 99$ would be a nice GPU

Xenos had the best GPU for its time and same will be for 720

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

I think it's more plausible that MS would go with a weaker 6670-level GPU and fully integrate Kinect into the Xbox experience, rather than go with a decent GPU. Kinect and Live are going to be everything to them. Poor strategy to sell it seperately. Having a contract-based option and Kinect included isn't out of the question.

loosingENDS

6670?

Sure, if they plan to release at 99$ would be a nice GPU

Xenos had the best GPU for its time and same will be for 720

At very best they might go with Kaveri, or a APU+GPU crossfire like Sony is rumored to be doing.

Kinect being bundled in with the X3 is more important than having another RRoD-inducing GPU onboard.

[QUOTE="gamecubepad"]

I think it's more plausible that MS would go with a weaker 6670-level GPU and fully integrate Kinect into the Xbox experience, rather than go with a decent GPU. Kinect and Live are going to be everything to them. Poor strategy to sell it seperately. Having a contract-based option and Kinect included isn't out of the question.

loosingENDS

6670?

Sure, if they plan to release at 99$ would be a nice GPU

Xenos had the best GPU for its time and same will be for 720

I won't believe anything until I see the official specs, but if true this does look promising.

1.) Microsoft just needs to drop the price of XBL significantly or make a subscription tier that caters to people that only want to play games. (possibly make it free to compete with Sony)

2.) Create new ip and continue to support XBLA

3.) Continue to make Halo

4.) Make sure their hardware will not fail and is affordable.

5.) Have the kinect 2 built into the next xbox.

6.) Have excellent Third party support

If most of these come true (especially #1 and 2) I will probably buy the next xbox first.

I actually agree with loosingEnds on the price. $300 with Kinect v2 seems way too low. Seriously.

But these pages, it would've taken ages to make them.

I actually agree with loosingEnds on the price. $300 with Kinect v2 seems way too low. Seriously.

But these pages, it would've taken ages to make them.

Masenkoe

I won't believe anything until I see the official specs, but if true this does look promising.

1.) Microsoft just needs to drop the price of XBL significantly or make a subscription tier that caters to people that only want to play games. (possibly make it free to compete with Sony)

2.) Create new ip and continue to support XBLA

3.) Continue to make Halo

4.) Make sure their hardware will not fail and is affordable.

5.) Have the kinect 2 built into the next xbox.

6.) Have excellent Third party support

If most of these come true (especially #1 and 2) I will probably buy the next xbox first.

MercenaryMafia

I actually agree with loosingEnds on the price. $300 with Kinect v2 seems way too low. Seriously.

But these pages, it would've taken ages to make them.

Masenkoe

[QUOTE="Masenkoe"]

I actually agree with loosingEnds on the price. $300 with Kinect v2 seems way too low. Seriously.

But these pages, it would've taken ages to make them.

o0squishy0o

Everything famicommander said coupled with the fact that there's spelling error's galore leads me to believe that this is totally fake.

Someone else mentioned it could be a college assignment of sorts, and that's exactly what it looks like. Made by someone who has limited knowledge and too much time. It's elaborate, but fake.

The very first dead give-away is the fact that the docs refer to the 720 as the "720". Alot of the other stuff is just vague enough to be interpreted as something MS plans to do with the next console anyway, or just glaringly obvious. It was made within the last month, despite the dates given.

I'm suprised so many SWs vets are falling for this.

To answer that, that's the image that came to my head when I wanted to make that post so I made that pic in under 2 minutes. Uploaded, posted.

Sounds legit. And good enough :)

Ridiculously fake, ridiculously stupid.famicommander

$299 with 10 years lifecycle. :lol:

$299 with 10 years lifecycle. :lol:

GamerwillzPS

10 months maybe

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

$299 with 10 years lifecycle. :lol:

loosingENDS

10 months maybe

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

$299 with 10 years lifecycle. :lol:

GamerwillzPS

10 months maybe

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

Bluray was the reason for PS3 to be more expensive. Stop pretending PS3 and 360 has different hardware capabilities.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

10 months maybe

PAL360

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

Bluray was the reason for PS3 to be more expensive. Hardware wise its not any more advanced than 360.

Wrong. PS3 is more advanced than the 360.

I have some proof, have a look at them:-

Killzone 2 'can't work' on Xbox 360

Uncharted 2 'impossible' on Xbox 360

Heavy Rain 'not possible' on Xbox 360

God of War 3 is 'only possible' on PS3

PS3 is 'more powerful' than the Xbox 360, and has potential for longevity

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

GamerwillzPS

Microsoft is getting and has gotten, heavily involved with cloud-based technology e.g Office 365 etc.

I imagine they'll make a major shift to Onlive-esque games a couple of years into 720s lifetime. Much of the heavy lifting will be done by powerful servers hundreds of miles away, thus reducing the workload on the hardware.

I reckon the console will be moderately powerful because the actual hardware will become more or less redundant for a lot of consumers a few years down the line. It'll get the console off the ground initially and then the Cloud will take over. The box will be just a means of streaming all the information and connecting with the controller etc.

Thus, a 10 year life cycle will be entirely possible. No need to launch a successor to the 720 when upgrades can be done instantaneously vis the internet. If Sony release a powerful, albeit expensive console with little reliance on cloud tech, I can see them being left in the dust. The age of the traditional console will end after next gen, quote me on it.

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

balfe1990

Microsoft is getting and has gotten, heavily involved with cloud-based technology e.g Office 365 etc.

I imagine they'll make a major shift to Onlive-esque games a couple of years into 720s lifetime. Much of the heavy lifting will be done by powerful servers hundreds of miles away, thus reducing the workload on the hardware.

I reckon the console will be moderately powerful because the actual hardware will become more or less redundant for a lot of consumers a few years down the line. It'll get the console off the ground initially and then the Cloud will take over. The box will be just a means of streaming all the information and connecting with the controller etc.

Thus, a 10 year life cycle will be entirely possible. No need to launch a successor to the 720 when upgrades can be done instantaneously vis the internet. If Sony release a powerful, albeit expensive console with little reliance on cloud tech, I can see them being left in the dust. The age of the traditional console will end after next gen, quote me on it.

Well, I have to say that this post got me a bit depressed. I don't like it.

Cloud gaming can GTFO and die. Did you see how horrible and laggy OnLive is? No way in hell I'm going to enjoy games over the cloud like that.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

GamerwillzPS

Bluray was the reason for PS3 to be more expensive. Hardware wise its not any more advanced than 360.

Wrong. PS3 is more advanced than the 360.

I have some proof, have a look at them:-

Killzone 2 'can't work' on Xbox 360

Uncharted 2 'impossible' on Xbox 360

Heavy Rain 'not possible' on Xbox 360

God of War 3 is 'only possible' on PS3

PS3 is 'more powerful' than the Xbox 360, and has potential for longevity

developers hired by sony saying that the games they making for a sony console will only work on a sony console?

seems legit

[QUOTE="balfe1990"]

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

GamerwillzPS

Microsoft is getting and has gotten, heavily involved with cloud-based technology e.g Office 365 etc.

I imagine they'll make a major shift to Onlive-esque games a couple of years into 720s lifetime. Much of the heavy lifting will be done by powerful servers hundreds of miles away, thus reducing the workload on the hardware.

I reckon the console will be moderately powerful because the actual hardware will become more or less redundant for a lot of consumers a few years down the line. It'll get the console off the ground initially and then the Cloud will take over. The box will be just a means of streaming all the information and connecting with the controller etc.

Thus, a 10 year life cycle will be entirely possible. No need to launch a successor to the 720 when upgrades can be done instantaneously vis the internet. If Sony release a powerful, albeit expensive console with little reliance on cloud tech, I can see them being left in the dust. The age of the traditional console will end after next gen, quote me on it.

Well, I have to say that this post got me a bit depressed. I don't like it.

Cloud gaming can GTFO and die. Did you see how horrible and laggy OnLive is? No way in hell I'm going to enjoy games over the cloud like that.

Why?

Onlive is basically the first turn of cloud-based gaming. Of course it's going to be riddled with problems and issues, that's natural.

Learning from your mistakes and taking advantage of rapidly advancing technology is also natural.Thinking it'sgoingto stay"horrible and laggy" forever is downright ridiculous. Cloud based gaming will improve with time and effort.

And like it or not, it'll probably be one of the few ways to enjoy "console" gaming in the next decade. Onlive has it's faults, but I'm sure one of the largest software giants on the planet can do one better than them with regards to quality and functionality.

You're just scared of change. As long as you get the great experience at the end of the day, what does it matter?

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="balfe1990"]

Microsoft is getting and has gotten, heavily involved with cloud-based technology e.g Office 365 etc.

I imagine they'll make a major shift to Onlive-esque games a couple of years into 720s lifetime. Much of the heavy lifting will be done by powerful servers hundreds of miles away, thus reducing the workload on the hardware.

I reckon the console will be moderately powerful because the actual hardware will become more or less redundant for a lot of consumers a few years down the line. It'll get the console off the ground initially and then the Cloud will take over. The box will be just a means of streaming all the information and connecting with the controller etc.

Thus, a 10 year life cycle will be entirely possible. No need to launch a successor to the 720 when upgrades can be done instantaneously vis the internet. If Sony release a powerful, albeit expensive console with little reliance on cloud tech, I can see them being left in the dust. The age of the traditional console will end after next gen, quote me on it.

balfe1990

Well, I have to say that this post got me a bit depressed. I don't like it.

Cloud gaming can GTFO and die. Did you see how horrible and laggy OnLive is? No way in hell I'm going to enjoy games over the cloud like that.

Why?

Onlive is basically the first turn of cloud-based gaming. Of course it's going to be riddled with problems and issues, that's natural.

Learning from your mistakes and taking advantage of rapidly advancing technology is also natural.Thinking it'sgoingto stay"horrible and laggy" forever is downright ridiculous. Cloud based gaming will improve with time and effort.

And like it or not, it'll probably be one of the few ways to enjoy "console" gaming in the next decade. Onlive has it's faults, but I'm sure one of the largest software giants on the planet can do one better than them with regards to quality and functionality.

You're just scared of change. As long as you get the great experience at the end of the day, what does it matter?

meh he's scared of anything that isn't made by sony :P

developers hired by sony saying that the games they making for a sony console will only work on a sony console?

seems legit

rilpas

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

Yeah, sounds about right.

There's no way that Microsoft could release an inferior console that lasts for 10 years. They would have to beef it up to last that long.

This is why Sony charged us £425 for a PS3 at launch. It's a console that is supposed to last for 10 years. PS3 has about 3 more years to go, and it still has some fuel in its tank. The 360 already ran out and is ready for next-gen.

GamerwillzPS

Bluray was the reason for PS3 to be more expensive. Hardware wise its not any more advanced than 360.

Wrong. PS3 is more advanced than the 360.

I have some proof, have a look at them:-

Killzone 2 'can't work' on Xbox 360

Uncharted 2 'impossible' on Xbox 360

Heavy Rain 'not possible' on Xbox 360

God of War 3 is 'only possible' on PS3

PS3 is 'more powerful' than the Xbox 360, and has potential for longevity

Third party devs, you know, the ones who are not biased, say both consoles are similar in tech. You just need to look at actual games. 360 and PS3 best looking games look equally good.

Sounds legit in a no-one-could-possibly-waste-this-much-time-faking-it kind of way. Slashkice

Even if it's fake it's probably pretty close to the mark.

Obviously fake.

They're not gonna put 12 cores in this thing, have it run on 120 watts, and the build cost $225.

Are you kidding me?

IF they achieve backwards compat it will be thru the OS, not like the PS3 where they stuff 2 consoles in 1 box.

Microsoft is alot smarter than that.

I can't see this being $299.GamingGod999

Me too.

If it's a hardcore console, I would expect it to be over £300 ($470).

Its far to well done and long to be a fake. Its clearly some type of investor breifing. Now how true all that is, as it appears 2010 we don't know

Based off this it appears they are going for a multi-media box with gaming. Any price higher than 399.99 would be sucided for the set top box market.

If it is fake someone better give this guy a job, becuase he knows wth he is talking about, and just layed out an amazing business plan.

[QUOTE="GamingGod999"]I can't see this being $299.GamerwillzPS

Me too.

If it's a hardcore console, I would expect it to be over £300 ($470).

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="GamingGod999"]I can't see this being $299.Stevo_the_gamer

Me too.

If it's a hardcore console, I would expect it to be over £300 ($470).

Elite? No, screw that. Cut the nonsense crap. They should make the hard drive upgradeable like the PS3, then there would be no need for crap like "Arcade, Premium or Elite". Just a single simple console. Confusing customers isn't a good thing.

[QUOTE="GamingGod999"]I can't see this being $299.GamerwillzPS

Me too.

If it's a hardcore console, I would expect it to be over £300 ($470).

alright, I'm sure microsoft will listen to you and just bump up the console's price, there you go everyone's happy :)