New Xbox requires an always-on connection to block used games

[Pottsey]

There is no doubt that tablets have made casual gaming a huge industry and yes, I agree, there are some cracking games on tablets/smartphones now. But let's not kid ourselves, you're not going to convince a "real" gamer to give up their console/PC and stick to whatever offering is on iOS/Android any time soon.

It has already happened with many "real" gamers converting. See

You have console graphics, console gameplay, console controller. So why by a console?

 

 

 

At which point why not just use a device designed for it, why the drive for everything to be one device, universal hammers are always horrible.

It is more why get an extra device (console) when your phone or tablet has enough power to do the job just as well?

 

The upcoming 2013 gen of chips will be more powerful then todays consoles. Tablet/phone today are designed to output for games just as much as consoles so why buy a 2nd device (console) to do a job you already have in your pocket.

 

We are slowly getting to the stage where you not need a PC or console. Just carry around a smartphone that fits into a docking station or wirelessly transmits to a keyboard, mouse and HD screen. This is how I see the future over the years to come. It will be a very slow change but it should happen over time. I already see lots of people watching TV via tablets/phones with on demand style services and playing games to the HD TV.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Pottsey

[LosOjos]

It has already happened with many "real" gamers converting. See

You have console graphics, console gameplay, console controller. So why by a console?

 

Bit out of context, we're talking about completely abandoning consoles and PC's in favour of playing games on a tablet, not playing games on a tablet in addition to the latter. I don't believe for one second that the hardcore gaming community is about to give up on consoles/PC for tablets; not one second.

 

It is more why get an extra device (console) when your phone or tablet has enough power to do the job just as well?

 

The upcoming 2013 gen of chips will be more powerful then todays consoles. Tablet/phone today are designed to output for games just as much as consoles so why buy a 2nd device (console) to do a job you already have in your pocket.

 

We are slowly getting to the stage where you not need a PC or console. Just carry around a smartphone that fits into a docking station or wirelessly transmits to a keyboard, mouse and HD screen. This is how I see the future over the years to come. It will be a very slow change but it should happen over time. I already see lots of people watching TV via tablets/phones with on demand style services and playing games to the HD TV.

 

Yes portability is great and for casual gamers I'm sure that will suffice. But if I'm heavy in to a game of Skyrim, I don't want it interrupted by an 42" image of my Gran and a deafening ring over my surround system as she calls me to discuss the cost of tea bags TYVM. [no offence Gran]

[sted]

id hate to play something like forza/pgr/gran turismo on a tablet every racing game ive tried is dire its so wrong turning/tilting the device its worse than driving with a dance mat (which is at least fun)

[Pottsey]

Bit out of context, we're talking about completely abandoning consoles and PC's in favour of playing games on a tablet, not playing games on a tablet in addition to the latter. I don't believe for one second that the hardcore gaming community is about to give up on consoles/PC for tablets; not one second.

Not sure it is out of context and it will not be a sudden case of completely abandoning consoles, it will be a very slow change over of peoples habits. No one in my circles users consoles as the primary gaming platform anymore. Many have already abandoned them or use them as secondary gaming devices for the odd exclusive game. Granted the sample size is far too small but I can see more people going down this path. Handholds have already gone futher down then road. We have gone from a school inhabited by a PSP’s and DS’s to smartphones. As more of those children grow up and use those devices connected to TV’s will they even want or need a console?

 

You say you cannot see the hardcore gaming community change but why? If the controller is the same, the games looks just as good or better than current gen, the setup is easy to use then why would they refuse to cross over? The world is moving to a big mash network with everything connected to everything and computers being devices you carry around with you. Too me the question is not when, but how long will this take.

 

 

 

Yes portability is great and for casual gamers I'm sure that will suffice. But if I'm heavy in to a game of Skyrim, I don't want it interrupted by an 42" image of my Gran and a deafening ring over my surround system as she calls me to discuss the cost of tea bags TYVM. [no offence Gran]

That is no different from Skype on the PC or voice chat on a console and you can always switch to gaming mode or use a tablet over a smartphone.

[tmcd35]

@Pottsey, while I see where you're coming from I think the market is already taking an alternative view. The Wii-U, whose central premise is a tablet controlled games console, isn't selling as well as Nintendo had hoped. Alternative gaming devices Playstation Move don't seem to get any traction. I'd be interested to know the uptake of Glass on the 360. Even the mighty iPod Touch that knocked Nintendo and Sony for six in the handheld market hasn't lead to a huge uptake in AppleTV's that would turn it in to the gaming system you describe.

 

It seems the majority of console gamers, like me, want a traditional games focused box hitched to their 55" OLED's and 7.1 DTS surround systems controlled with the old old faithful Six-Axis (or 360 equivalent).

 

Besides, because of battery life, heat dissipation and product size, mobile gaming will alway lag behind what is currently possible in top end dedicated gaming products (be they PC or console). By the time mobiles catch up to Generation 8 (they are only now starting to kick at the heels of G7) we'd be reading about the immanent release of G9 consoles.

 

Which is why hardcore gamers are unlikely ever to embrace that model. Mobiles are good for casual games like Tetris. Don't want to play Batman or Gran Tourismo on one though!

[X-13]

It seems the majority of console gamers, like me, want a traditional games focused box hitched to their 55" OLED's and 7.1 DTS surround systems controlled with the old old faithful Six-Axis (or 360 equivalent).

 

QFT.

 

I'd rather have a console specifically designed to play games on, than something that can sort-of play games by overheating and draining the battery. [seriously, Angry Birds overheats my Galaxy S and drains the battery like nobodies business.]

[LosOjos]

@Pottsey I can see your point but you are missing one vital fact - by the time mobile devices have caught up with current gen consoles in terms of graphics and memory capability, dedicated consoles will be generations ahead.

 

The simple fact is, tech takes time to be scaled down. The GPU in a smartphone today is just as good as it was in a PC 10 years ago, but nowhere near a current gen gaming PC. Unless there is some radical discovery in the way chips are manufactured (which I'm not denying there could be), it will always be the case that portable devices are a couple of generations behind.

 

This is why I can't see the hardcore gaming community moving away from a dedicated device - to many of them, games being at the bleeding edge of hardware technology is important, it's part of the fun to see just how far games can push graphics, detail and story depth, and this always ends up coming to the point where the hardware needs improving, hence next gen consoles.

[Pottsey]

Besides, because of battery life, heat dissipation and product size, mobile gaming will alway lag behind what is currently possible in top end dedicated gaming products (be they PC or console). By the time mobiles catch up to Generation 8 (they are only now starting to kick at the heels of G7) we'd be reading about the immanent release of G9 consoles.

 

Which is why hardcore gamers are unlikely ever to embrace that model. Mobiles are good for casual games like Tetris. Don't want to play Batman or Gran Tourismo on one though!

Many people do. Need for Speed Shift, GTA, Deadspace and even Sims 3 are pretty popular on tablets. Heat, battery life are not really a problem for tablets with docking stations. product size is a plus to tablets.

 

 

 

@Pottsey I can see your point but you are missing one vital fact - by the time mobile devices have caught up with current gen consoles in terms of graphics and memory capability, dedicated consoles will be generations ahead.

 

The simple fact is, tech takes time to be scaled down. The GPU in a smartphone today is just as good as it was in a PC 10 years ago, but nowhere near a current gen gaming PC. Unless there is some radical discovery in the way chips are manufactured (which I'm not denying there could be), it will always be the case that portable devices are a couple of generations behind.

 

This is why I can't see the hardcore gaming community moving away from a dedicated device - to many of them, games being at the bleeding edge of hardware technology is important, it's part of the fun to see just how far games can push graphics, detail and story depth, and this always ends up coming to the point where the hardware needs improving, hence next gen consoles.

With the way development and R&D goes the gap is getting shorter. This generation was the first time mobiles over took consoles in graphic power. If current technology trends are as expected future mobiles will catch up to consoles half way through the next gen console life span and spend the 2nd half of the lifespan ahead of the consoles. This might be the tipping point.

 

The gen after if there is one for consoles the gap will be even shorter. If you look at the R&D company’s we are already seeing the start of advance technology like Ray tracing being developed for mobiles. Console are not expected to have for over 10years in the generation after next. This could lead to crazy situation when in 5 to 6 years current console will be half way though there life span with mobiles looking far better graphically.

 

I think I might be derailing this thread, didn’t mean to. One thing I do agree on is always on connection is bad. My experience with that has been nothing but bad.

 

 

 

 

EDIT"

“The GPU in a smartphone today is just as good as it was in a PC 10 years ago, but nowhere near a current gen gaming PC.”

I think you might need to take a look at mobile tech. Mobiles over took 10 year old PC’s years ago. Last gen chips where only a tiny bit behind the Xbox360. The 2013 mobile chips I believe are due to be x3 faster than the Xbox360 in power and are only a few years behind PC’s. Graphics Company’s R&D no longer scale down larger chips to mobile level but develop from mobile level upwards. The rate of mobile technology advance has been amazing recently.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Pottsey

[sonofsanta]

I think the main thing to bear in mind is that 6 years ago there were no smartphones as we now know them, not all-glass touchscreen beauties as begat by the iPhone. So guessing what will happen in another 6 years is entirely futile. The singularity, it approaches.

[LosOjos]

Many people do. Need for Speed Shift, GTA, Deadspace and even Sims 3 are pretty popular on tablets. Heat, battery life are not really a problem for tablets with docking stations. product size is a plus to tablets.

 

all popular because people grew fond of them on console/PC and are playing for nostalgia factor and "oh cool I can get this on my phone now!"

 

With the way development and R&D goes the gap is getting shorter. This generation was the first time mobiles over took consoles in graphic power. If current technology trends are as expected future mobiles will catch up to consoles half way through the next gen console life span and spend the 2nd half of the lifespan ahead of the consoles. This might be the tipping point.

 

I agree that if R&D pushes for mobile gaming, that's what we'll get, but for all the claims about mobile surpassing consoles - which mobile do you have?! I'm not denying mobile games are getting much better but I'm yet to see one capable of running Skyrim, GTA5, Call of Duty etc.

[tmcd35]

With the way development and R&D goes the gap is getting shorter. This generation was the first time mobiles over took consoles in graphic power. If current technology trends are as expected future mobiles will catch up to consoles half way through the next gen console life span and spend the 2nd half of the lifespan ahead of the consoles. This might be the tipping point.

 

I'm not sure what the best benchmark comparrison is but a quick internet search shows the Tegra 4 (best mobile GPU) weighing in at 74GFLOPS. An entry level GeForce 600 starts at around 150GFLOPS for mobile and around 2500GFLOPS top end. Next gen consoles are likely to weigh in at this top end...

 

If you look at the R&D company’s we are already seeing the start of advance technology like Ray tracing being developed for mobiles. Console are not expected to have for over 10years in the generation after next.

 

I've a feeling you've been reading the same PowerVR stories I have. Truth be told Real Time Ray Tracing is the golden goose of GPU design. Still supposed to be 10 years off, even for mobile. I'm sure if it was worth while and came about sooner Sony and MS would license the tech from PowerVR for there next next gen's. I've read reports recently they suggest that current gen polygon shifters are so good that there's little to no benefit in real time ray tracing.

 

I think I might be derailing this thread, didn’t mean to.

Some thread's are meant to be derailed EduGeeks more interesting for the topical discussions we get from them!

[Pottsey]

I'm not sure what the best benchmark comparrison is but a quick internet search shows the Tegra 4 (best mobile GPU) weighing in at 74GFLOPS. An entry level GeForce 600 starts at around 150GFLOPS for mobile and around 2500GFLOPS top end. Next gen consoles are likely to weigh in at this top end..."

Tegra is one of the slowest mobile GPU’s and missing core graphics features. Not really sure what Nvidia are playing at as you would think if anyone would make a good mobile GPU it would be them. For some reason Nvidia always seem to be years behind at mobile GPU performance.

 

Rogue chips that have just started showing look to be around 210Gflops and 13Gpixels/sec for the low end 2 cluster version. There is a 4 cluster version which I assume has twice the power. On top of that PowerVR mobile chips use a tiled based deferred rendering architecture so they effectively do x3 the work for each bit of raw speed compared to desktop cards. That makes a direct comparison a little tricky as a 100gflops PowerVR chip can in theory perform at the same level as say a 300gflops NVidia chip roughly speaking as its more complicated than that. A better example is the Kyro 2 was a tiled based deferred rendering with the raw specs far lower than a Geforce 2 MX yet it could compete against it.

 

If the raw specs of 210 Gflops turn out to be true we could be talking around 500gflops worth of desktop type GPU power in mobiles this year, enough power for Skyrim, GTA5, Call of Duty . Next gen consoles will win out at first but they will find in a short time mobile GPU's will have overtaken them. Either consoles makers need to half the lifespan for next gen consoles or they will fall behind. Or come up with some other idea.

 

 

“Truth be told Real Time Ray Tracing is the golden goose of GPU design. Still supposed to be 10 years off, even for mobile"

Not sure if you heard but PowerVR just starting shipping the Real Time Ray Tracing card in recent weeks. Still a long way from gaming mind you but the speed for the card is very impressive considering its low specs. Would love to get one to play with but the price is a little high just to mess around with. The high end chip is 65W maximum with the lower end chip 30 Watts max. But that is on an ancient 90nm process without power optimizations. Just imagine it shrank down to a 28-nm process or even 14-nm in a few years with a few power optimizations. It could well catch a few company’s off guard when it’s done in a few years’ time. (Few as in most likely 5 to 6 I guess in mobiles)

 

One of the benefits of Ray Tracing is lowering production costs while giving better lights and shadows. You no longer need artists to spend time messing around with faking lights and placing shadow maps as it is all done for you. Personally I see the RTU chips merging into the GPU with a hybrid of Ray Tracing and GPU solution being the way forward.

[Arthur]

If the raw specs of 210 Gflops turn out to be true we could be talking around 500 gflops worth of desktop type GPU power in mobiles this year, enough power for Skyrim, GTA5, Call of Duty.

What about memory bandwidth though? There's a massive difference between PC graphics cards and tablets/smartphones.

 

Samsung Exynos 5 Dual (Nexus 10): 12.8 GigaBytes/s (72.488 GFLOPS)

nVidia GeForce GTX 680: 192.3 GigaBytes/s (3,090.4 GFLOPS)

nVidia GeForce GTX Titan: ~250 GigaBytes/s

[tmcd35]

One of the benefits of Ray Tracing is lowering production costs while giving better lights and shadows.

 

I'm guessing this is the story we are both discussing:

 

Shedding some realistic light on Imagination’s real-time ray tracing card | Ars Technica

 

The first highlighted comment makes for some interesting reading, talking about real time ray tracing being a decelerator on performance for most games and suggesting incremental improvements in current GPU tech taking up the slack for what real time ray tracing requirements we might have.

[Pottsey]

What about memory bandwidth though? There's a massive difference between PC graphics cards and tablets/smartphones.

 

Samsung Exynos 5 Dual (Nexus 10): 12.8 GigaBytes/s (72.488 GFLOPS)

nVidia GeForce GTX 680: 192.3 GigaBytes/s (3,090.4 GFLOPS)

nVidia GeForce GTX Titan: ~250 GigaBytes/s

That is an interesting question and is solved by Tiled based deferred rendering architecture’s. These split the screen into tiles and require far less bandwidth then more common desktop card architectures. A good exmple years back the tiled based Kyro desktop card could get away with low bandwidth SDR ram while Nvidia and ATI cards all needed DDR. Oversimplified it splits the screen into tiles see http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4986698380673025&pid=15.1 and renders each tile one at a time.

 

Another benefit is 99% of overdraw is remove. Say there is a wall, everything behind the wall is removed, and then the screen is rendered. This can vastly reducing memory needed, bandwidth needed and improving speed.

 

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.5047532302762247&pid=15.1

This picture explains it a bit better than me. Conventional Nvidia and ATI cards render almost everything, PowerVR only render visible surfaces.

 

http://www.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/201201/31/094/10.gif

A conventional Nvidia and ATI would require 43 Mpixiles to render that screen. PowerVR require 14.4 Mpixiles to render that screen which is why I say the specs can be x3 lower but the performance the same. Hopefully this explains how mobiles are closing the gap with desktop GPU's.

 

This diffrence in architecture’s makes it a little tricky to compare raw mobile GPU specs to raw Desktop GPU specs. As a guideline I times all Tiled based deferred rendering architecture’s specs by 3 to compare to Nvidia and ATI architecture’s. But it really depends on the scene being rendered. A racing screen in open fields or some sort of Airplane scene is going have few hidden objects to remove while a city scene is going have a massive amount of surfaces to remove.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Pottsey

[SYNACK]

As for deadspace, I need the screaming of undead amped in my 1200W surround system, on a big screen, in the dark, nothing else cuts it.

 

GPU wise, sure they may be catching up to the 6 year old system that is about to be replaced but try current gen.

 

Oh and iPhoney fanboys, I have had a smartphone since 2003, iPoo was not the start, my WM2003 phone had features not even thought of till 2008-10. Steve Jobs did not invent everything.

Edited February 8, 2013 by SYNACK

[featured_spectre]

Here is my argument, why would the companies (sony or microsoft) get themselves OUT of the market by doing this?

 

On the PC it is effective because of the fact that it is a one off serial code and people have grown used to this, but such a thing is still a big bitchfest on consoles. Infact when I made the switch, I was surprised that they weren't already implimenting some form of serial key, then EA started doing it, and then next thing you know, console fanboys are going mental because they can no longer get 2nd hand EA games.

 

What I dont understand, is why does it bother people, 2nd hand games are great, but buying a serial for £10 will hardly break the bank, and if you buy the 2nd hand game quite new, you're better off buying the game new.

[tmcd35]

but buying a serial for £10 will hardly break the bank, and if you buy the 2nd hand game quite new, you're better off buying the game new.

 

That's the real question, didn't see it in the OP. If MS or Sony allow retailers to sell re-activation codes with second hand games then I can't see any cause for complaint. Or, better still, a online system for reactivation. So long as the developer is getting paid for each use of their product. Still £10 might be a bit steep depending on the value of the second hand game...

[TechMonkey]

Still £10 might be a bit steep depending on the value of the second hand game...

& this is part of the issue. Considering how much Game and CEX are charging for second hand games, add £10 and it becomes the same price or more expensive than a first hand game. Or that bargain old game suddenly becomes less attractive at around double the price. Then you just know the game shops will want their cut of the second hand codes or they won't sell them so that £10 creeps up. Maybe they get popular so the price increases ("to keep up with the level of development" of course) and so on and so on.

 

Also I doubt you or I won't be able to get or generate these codes so we have no choice but to sell them on to companies to get the profit and they will have even more of an excuse to pay a pittance. Or if the system allows people to generate their own when you Ebay a game and suddenly you have to provide aftercare support when teh person who bought hasn't a clue what to do. What about hand me down games? I've just given a whole stack of games to my Nephew who got an Xbox for Christmas, there is no way I could do that if I or his mum have to try and buy a load of replay codes.

 

I guess what it comes down to is that there are far too many unknowns based on this tiny rumour so for now we just have to wait and see.

[X-13]

So long as the developer is getting paid for each use of their product.

 

What? No.

 

Why the [censored] do devs think they should be paid multiple times for the came copy?

 

Even if there's a multiplay element, no matter who has it it still counts as 1 connection. Which has been paid for.

[tmcd35]

Now come on @X-13, this is basic copyright stuff! The fact that they don't get duly compensated for each copy sold is the reason prices are stupidly high - £60 for a new game!?! People rent games or buy second hand because the prices are so high. Every game that is rented or played second hand, like piracy, is a lost sale. Once you've completed the game you're unlikely to go buy a new copy just to say thank you to the people who made it. If the devs don't get compensated appropriately they go out of business and we don't get new games.

 

The status quo is the first person to purchase the game is paying quiet a high price for everybody else to play the game, a little unfair. The only place I have a problem is if the Publishers are keeping prices artificially high to make profit at the expense of the developers.

[Roberto]

Not exactly immersive in comparison, I defy a tablet to be more compelling than my 55" TV and surround system, the whole feedback thing from an ergonomic controller with analogue buttons is also much nicer than jabbing relentlessly as a Paine of glass.

 

Agree. There are some games that work well, better even on a tablet but there are also some games that work better on a big TV, and some games that work better on a PC. I think it would be a shame if one of those segments killed the others off.

 

I do think that tablet/smartphone devices are going to be king at casual gaming. But that's where they excel.

[X-13]

The fact that they don't get duly compensated for each copy sold is the reason prices are stupidly high - £60 for a new game!?!

 

It's not my fault publishers are greedy and take the majority of the profits.

 

If they want to be paid more, get a better publisher.

 

Every game that is rented or played second hand, like piracy, is a lost sale.

 

Try again.

 

 

Next you'll be saying piracy is theft.

 

Once you've completed the game you're unlikely to go buy a new copy just to say thank you to the people who made it.

 

I've, personally, done this.

 

Multiple times.

 

 

If the devs don't get compensated appropriately they go out of business and we don't get new games.

 

You mean like Big Huge games/38 studios?

 

Where EA took 70% of the profits and just let them burn?

 

 

Again, it's not my fault they got into bed with a scummy company. And screwing over the people keeping you in business isn't right.

[tmcd35]

@X-13, Are you seriously arguing that, regardless of media (movies, music, games, etc), someone who has put in a lot of time and effort creating an original creative work should not be properly compensated for their time, effort and creativity?

 

As for greedy publishers. There does seem to be a post iOS trend back towards indie developers that download only gaming seems to have invigorated. This can only be viewed as a good thing.

 

Try again.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right - as the old saying goes.

 

Next you'll be saying piracy is theft.

Of course it is! And if I've ever done it, I've done it knowingly!

[X-13]

@X-13, Are you seriously arguing that, regardless of media (movies, music, games, etc), someone who has put in a lot of time and effort creating an original creative work should not be properly compensated for their time, effort and creativity?

 

Nope. I'm arguing they have no right to demand payment for something that was already sold. Once I buy something, I own it. It's up to me what I do with it. That includes selling it on.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right - as the old saying goes.

 

Getting screwed by publishers = wrong.

 

Screwing over fans to conmpensate = also wrong.

 

Of course it is! And if I've ever done it, I've done it knowingly!

 

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

 

No-one is being deprived of anything. In fact, MORE are being made.

 

 

Piracy isn't theft. It's copying.

Edited February 11, 2013 by X-13