PDA

View Full Version : How well will XBOX do at its anniversary?


admin
04-16-2002, 11:31 PM
Currently the install base of XBOX is around 1.7 millions in US, how well do you think the system will do after 1 year? Will it break 6 millions as Microsoft projected? What killer apps would you like to see on XBOX? How about sequel of classic favorites like a real 3D Ghouls n' Ghost, an XBOX treat of Tekken Tag 2, or a souped up version of Virtua Fighter 4tb?

??????

jammer
04-17-2002, 07:26 AM
Hi.

It's been a slow start for the Asia-Pacific and Europe regions so far that I've heard. And with the big disc-scratching scandal in Japan, it might be into mid next year before the large sales numbers given the lukewarm reception everywhere else except North America.

With Panzer Dragoon X coming to X-Box and a couple of other Japanese titles this fall/winter, hopefully, Square will bring Final Fantasy Online over to the X-Box...

I have no doubt of X-Box's success but it needs more exclusive titles like Halo and Jetset Radio Future.

Cheers,
jammer

Overlord
04-17-2002, 11:03 PM
Most of the people I know, says that they are looking more foward to the Big N's anniversary than the X's. Mainly cause of there big first party titles coming out. Even though they are getting delayed like every month.

The Xbox needs to show some good games at E3 in a few weeks to get more attention and help sales.

Of course a price drop will always help.

I for one am looking forward to PS2's holiday. Maybe not the online stuff, but the other games. Arcade-Perfect Soul Calibur 2 and Tekken 4. Kingdom Hearts. Maybe GT4, and Grand Theft Auto sequel/add-on.

Evapilot
04-18-2002, 04:40 AM
Nintendo's already shown it's big titles for the fall, and they've probably got a trump card or two to reveal at E3. Microsoft hasn't really shown jack. They need to impress the hell out of everyone at E3 -- or Christmas might not be everything they're praying for.

Last year they had Halo... they'd better have a sequel or something damned near close. Everyone bought it for Halo, and has since been stuck with very few exclusives (Rallisport Challenge & Spider-Man are the only ones I've found purchase-worthy since the launch releases).

The problem with all of the systems these days is that many of the big games are going to be multi-platform. If somebody has all three systems, they're going to find it hard to make the choice. Go for graphics? Get the X-Box version. Better controller? PS2 or Cube versions.

Microsoft did manage a very nice exclusive with the best version of Spider-Man, though. Not only are the graphics a step up from the PS2 version, but the two added levels add a lot to the game. At the GameStop I work at, we sold 22 of the 24 X-Box copies, 15 of the 48 PS2 copies, 4 of the 8 Cube copies, and 1 of the 9 PC copies. There's a clear winner. :p

The Cube version actually looks better than the PS2 version, and very close to the X-Box version. Too bad the installed base doesn't compare to the PS2's. And the PS2 controller is just perfect. :p

Ok, I'm rambling. Sorry.

oerjaN
04-18-2002, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by Evapilot
Microsoft did manage a very nice exclusive with the best version of Spider-Man, though. Not only are the graphics a step up from the PS2 version, but the two added levels add a lot to the game. At the GameStop I work at, we sold 22 of the 24 X-Box copies, 15 of the 48 PS2 copies, 4 of the 8 Cube copies, and 1 of the 9 PC copies. There's a clear winner. :p


there might be a good explanation, xBox owners really don't have
that much interesting games too choose from.

Bishamon
04-18-2002, 02:48 PM
I don't mean to get off-topic, but I've always hated the PS/PS2 controllers. I was just in love with the Japanese Saturn controllers, and the Dreamcast controlers were AMAZING for driving games with their analog triggers for gas/brake. The PS2 controllers are terrible, IMO. It may have to do with my taste in games, however, which tends to be heavy on the 2D fighting and 3D driving variety. The PS2 controlers are horrible for driving because the so-called analog buttons are no good for fine gas and brake contol like the Dreamcast controller, and the d-pad on the PS2 is just plain painful for pulling off fireball and dragon-punch motions.

IMO, the XBox controller is beautiful! Analog gas/brake triggers, and the ability to push the analog sticks down makes croutching or zooming in Halo WAY better than playing a FPS on another console.

Pexi
04-21-2002, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by Bishamon
I don't mean to get off-topic, but I've always hated the PS/PS2 controllers. I was just in love with the Japanese Saturn controllers, and the Dreamcast controlers were AMAZING for driving games with their analog triggers for gas/brake. The PS2 controllers are terrible, IMO. It may have to do with my taste in games, however, which tends to be heavy on the 2D fighting and 3D driving variety. The PS2 controlers are horrible for driving because the so-called analog buttons are no good for fine gas and brake contol like the Dreamcast controller, and the d-pad on the PS2 is just plain painful for pulling off fireball and dragon-punch motions.

I totally agree with you:)

TriForce
05-07-2002, 09:08 PM
The Xbox won't even be close to 6 million units after one year. They are down to six months left already, and this summer looks to have slim pickings for those of us that know a PC game in console clothing when we see one. That's not a good way to move hardware.

aneep
05-08-2002, 02:43 AM
PS2 have more PC games than Xbox

and MS target 9 million by year end AFAIR

and in the US the installed base for Xbox is close or a bit more than 1.8 million with around 200k in JP (lots of conflicting report about Xbox userbase in EU, especially after the pricecut)

will they achieve their target? i honestly don't know
they are looking to make a big splash at E3, but will this moved systems as much as they hope?
we'll see
E3 in 2 weeks

-aneep-

Bishamon
05-08-2002, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by aneep
PS2 have more PC games than Xbox



THAT'S for sure! And I certainly wouldn't call exclusive titles like Jet Grind Radio Future, Panzer Dragoon Orta, DoA3, Sega GT 2002, MSR, RalliSport Challenge, House of the Dead 3, Crazy Taxi 3, etc, 'PC games in console clothing'. LOL


and in the US the installed base for Xbox is close or a bit more than 1.8 million with around 200k in JP (lots of conflicting report about Xbox userbase in EU, especially after the pricecut)

will they achieve their target? i honestly don't know
they are looking to make a big splash at E3, but will this moved systems as much as they hope?
we'll see
E3 in 2 weeks

-aneep-

I believe they are at around 2 million in the States now, with the GC weighing in around 1.8 million. I don't feel they'll reach their original sales target, though.

TriForce
05-08-2002, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Bishamon


I certainly wouldn't call exclusive titles like Jet Grind Radio Future, Panzer Dragoon Orta, DoA3, Sega GT 2002, MSR, RalliSport Challenge, House of the Dead 3, Crazy Taxi 3, etc, 'PC games in console clothing'.And I said this summer. Out of that list, the only summer releases (meaning June through August) is Crazy Taxi 3 on July 23rd. As I said, slim pickings.

Bishamon
05-08-2002, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by TriForce
And I said this summer. Out of that list, the only summer releases (meaning June through August) is Crazy Taxi 3 on July 23rd. As I said, slim pickings.

That's one more title than those of interest to me out of the summer PS2 releases. :D

Actually, HoTD3 is supposed to come out June 15th and Sega GT 2002 is scheduled for June 23rd. That makes three from my list.

Here is the XBox release list for June through July:

6.01 Wave Rally RAC Eidos
6.03 Red Card 2003 SPT Midway
6.04 Mike Tyson Heavyweight Boxing SPT Codemasters
Test Drive RAC Infogrames
6.15 The House of the Dead 3 GSTG Sega
Sega GT 2002 RAC Sega
6.17 Prisoner of War ACT Codemasters
6.24 Gravity Games Bike RAC Midway
6.25 Splashdown RAC Infogrames
7.01 Tetris World PZG THQ
Toxic Grind ACT THQ
7.02 Bruce Lee: Quest of the Dragon ACT Vivendi Universal
7.23 Buffy the Vampire Slayer ACT Electronic Arts
Crazy Taxi 3: High Roller RAC Sega
Dead to Rights ACT Namco
NCAA Football 2003 SPT EA Sports
7.29 MLB Slugfest 2003 SPT Midway

Rubeus
05-08-2002, 02:26 PM
Microsoft has already lowered the sales target from 6 millions to 4 millions last month, that's a 33% cut from the estimate!

I heard there are tons of used Xbox in the Japanese market, people just throw the system out of the door after finishing DOA3.
A used Xbox is selling at a price of the Gamecube in Japan! Maybe it will drop even further ....

Bishamon
05-08-2002, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by Rebeus
Microsoft has already lowered the sales target from 6 millions to 4 millions last month, that's a 33% cut from the estimate!

I heard there are tons of used Xbox in the Japanese market, people just throw the system out of the door after finishing DOA3.
A used Xbox is selling at a price of the Gamecube in Japan! Maybe it will drop even further ....

Yeah, the price of a used XBox just dropped below the price of a used PS2 in Japan.

aneep
05-09-2002, 06:03 AM
i wish ppl would stop saying they know Japan when

1)they are not japanese
2)they don't live there

-aneep-

Bishamon
05-09-2002, 09:51 AM
Actually, the information I posted was obtained by reading a website called 'The Magic Box'. Perhaps you've heard of it? :D

aneep
05-09-2002, 04:16 PM
not u Bishamon :)

maybe i'm just too tired reading all these 'expert views' of the japanese console market

esp. because i probably read more about all these market stuff (retailer surveys, financial reports, etc) everyday than these so called 'experts'

and yes MS did lower their target for June (down to 3.5mil to 4 mil form 4.5million to 6 million)

and in the same press release they reiterate their target of 9 million by year end (financial year)

-aneep-

HFIL
05-09-2002, 09:36 PM
well I dunno, Insulting the xbox summer lineup doesn't make sense to me.. All three systems are having a rather dry summer,

and fall is gonna be jam packed w/ good games.... Its the calm before the storm..

as far as good summer xbox games...
Crazy taxi, and Elder scrolls 3 look like must buys (sure I could get ES3: marrowind for the PC... but it looks better on my HI-res TV)

The on the GC games I'm looking forward to Bomberman, Eternal Darkness: SR, and lost kingdoms

Ps2.. I'm looking forward to Akira Pshycoball

but thats just me.. I'm mostly waiting for fall...

Seska
05-10-2002, 03:13 PM
Morrowind is a must-buy, though I actually wonder how popular it will be on X-Box as it is so totally unlike any console RPG that has been ever released. Console RPGs have normally been attributed to be linear and plot-based, while Morrowind is totaly open-ended. I have been playing the game for the past week and enjoying it a lot, though I can't say tis been the plot that has hooked me, as much as exploring and doing all sorts of small quests have been.

And it will always look better on my PC than on TV with an x-box - but then again I DID invest a generous amount of cash on my PC, after all. :p

HFIL
05-10-2002, 07:06 PM
But then Again I have my x-box hooked up to a 46" HDTV via component cables.. with a $2000 sound system

Bishamon
05-13-2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by Seska
And it will always look better on my PC than on TV with an x-box - but then again I DID invest a generous amount of cash on my PC, after all. :p

Well, I can guarantee, especially since the devs were stating that the XBox version will have all graphical features included in the PC version (which require a very high end PC to enable), that it will look better on my 40" widescreen HDTV regardless of what PC it is running on. :D

Seska
05-20-2002, 07:09 AM
Originally posted by Bishamon

it will look better on my 40" widescreen HDTV regardless of what PC it is running on. :D

Um... does your widescreen HDTV support a 2000x3000 resolution?


Thought not.

Alucard
05-20-2002, 07:16 AM
To actually think a console version of a game would look better then the PC version basically shows you really dont pay attention. Having a HDTV doesn't mean your picture quality wil be better then a monitors. Just for the simple fact as the person before me stated. The resolution makes a big difference. And I'm also sure the aliasing on the XBox probably isn't as good as the Geforce4.

You can have the best sound system. The biggest HDTV in the world. But at the end of the day, no chance would it beat a PC in detail and graphics UNLESS the console version of the game had alot of graphical extras. And I don't see any. They may not be including the shimmering effect of the water in the XBox version. Then again thats what the extra month delay may be about. But never is a console version better then a PC version, if the game is exactly the same programmed. No matter what your set up.

A monitor is far more advanced for a display then a HDTV will ever be.

typexig
05-20-2002, 02:17 PM
what game is Akira Pshycoball? do you have any info about it?..=)

-Xig-

Bishamon
05-21-2002, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by Alucard
To actually think a console version of a game would look better then the PC version basically shows you really dont pay attention. Having a HDTV doesn't mean your picture quality wil be better then a monitors. Just for the simple fact as the person before me stated. The resolution makes a big difference. And I'm also sure the aliasing on the XBox probably isn't as good as the Geforce4.

You can have the best sound system. The biggest HDTV in the world. But at the end of the day, no chance would it beat a PC in detail and graphics UNLESS the console version of the game had alot of graphical extras. And I don't see any. They may not be including the shimmering effect of the water in the XBox version. Then again thats what the extra month delay may be about. But never is a console version better then a PC version, if the game is exactly the same programmed. No matter what your set up.

A monitor is far more advanced for a display then a HDTV will ever be.

There was no need to get personal. I seem to detect a little 'console envy'. ;)

A monitor cannot compensate for lack of graphical features implemented in the game. I would rather have more graphical features implemented than be running at an outrageously high resolution. Your comments show an inexperience with consoles and HDTV. Take your head out of the sand and take a look at what is being done with widescreen support in console videogames. Take a look at Halo and then show me one PC game that compares graphically; You can't, because some of the features being used aren't available in Direct X yet. Sorry.

Alucard
05-22-2002, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by Bishamon


There was no need to get personal. I seem to detect a little 'console envy'. ;)

A monitor cannot compensate for lack of graphical features implemented in the game. I would rather have more graphical features implemented than be running at an outrageously high resolution. Your comments show an inexperience with consoles and HDTV. Take your head out of the sand and take a look at what is being done with widescreen support in console videogames. Take a look at Halo and then show me one PC game that compares graphically; You can't, because some of the features being used aren't available in Direct X yet. Sorry.

Now you got me going.. I dunno about this 'console envy'. Cause if a console has a game I like, I buy it. It's fairly simple. I wont sit in the corner and fume and say I dont like a console because I am clueless and biased. I see myself buying an XBox. Down the track ofcourse. Perhaps when Panzar Dragoon comes out.

Now you say you'd rather have more graphical features in a game then high resolution. Yet you follow up that by saying I should look at what widescreen support is doing. Thats not graphics. That comes down in the same category as high resolution. Because it is a feature of the monitor device, not the graphical features. So therefore I think the one in the sand is yourself.

I used to sell HDTVs at the store I worked at. I know what they can give, and I know how impressive they are. But as I said, I still prefer a monitor to a HDTV. Everyone has their own preferences. But as for Halo somehow being something that the PC cannot do right now, thats a little untrue. And for games that look better? Thats fairly easy. Morrowind is one. I'd like to see the XBox version come out and see if they did or did not include the shimmery water. I wont bother with the term because to me it will always be 'shimmery water'.

Sadly some of the games I'd like to add to the list are still not out. Such as Unreal Tournament 2 for example. Halo doesn't compare to this. Not by a long shot. Theres plenty games out or coming, but I really can't be bothered going through lists of them to refresh my memory. I know what the systems can do. I know what a monitor can do. I also know what a HDTV can do. But as I said before, the level of detail brought by higher resolution will always beat a HDTV. And I will stick to that one comment and not side track as you did.

Bishamon
05-22-2002, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Alucard


Now you got me going.. I dunno about this 'console envy'. Cause if a console has a game I like, I buy it. It's fairly simple. I wont sit in the corner and fume and say I dont like a console because I am clueless and biased. I see myself buying an XBox. Down the track ofcourse. Perhaps when Panzar Dragoon comes out.

Sounds pretty reasonable. Maybe I jumped to conclusions. I apologize.

Now you say you'd rather have more graphical features in a game then high resolution. Yet you follow up that by saying I should look at what widescreen support is doing. Thats not graphics. That comes down in the same category as high resolution. Because it is a feature of the monitor device, not the graphical features. So therefore I think the one in the sand is yourself.

I have to disagree; a game with widescreen support offers a better viewpoint than games without; you can see more of the track in GT3, more of the fighting environment in DoA3, etc. It may not be a graphical feature in the same way that bump mapping is, but it is still a graphics-related feature that not only looks better, but improves gameplay. Higher resolution only sharpens the image but doesn't enlarge the viewing area. Of course, there are rare exceptions, like BattleZone for PC, where you could set the game to increase the viewing area as resolution increased, giving players with better video cards (at the time) an advantage when playing online. But I digress.

I used to sell HDTVs at the store I worked at. I know what they can give, and I know how impressive they are. But as I said, I still prefer a monitor to a HDTV. Everyone has their own preferences. But as for Halo somehow being something that the PC cannot do right now, thats a little untrue. And for games that look better? Thats fairly easy. Morrowind is one. I'd like to see the XBox version come out and see if they did or did not include the shimmery water. I wont bother with the term because to me it will always be 'shimmery water'.

Actually, there are graphical features used in Halo that are not currently possible if the PC game uses Direct X; these features are slated for Direct X 9. Here is a good excerpt from an interview with a PC/XBox software developer:

"That's impossible to emulate in software, because games on X-Box can be
designed to load stuff once in to memory and use it directly without
uploading it to the graphics card. The whole memory management code for a
well-written native X-Box game is therefore completely different from a PC
game.

"It would be analogous to running your entire application out of VRAM. In
fact, running the whole thing out of VRAM might work as a substitute on the
PC, but the bus bandwidth would be greatly reduced - AGP 4X probably
wouldn't cut it."

Despite claims that it's Windows-compatible, X-Box runs its own OS. Although
the API bears a strong resemblance to the Win32 API, there are new functions
in X-Box that simply don't exist in Windows, and vice-versa; plus many API
functions that have the same name ignore certain parameters (this is
especially true of the WinSock implementation).

More critically, we learn that X-Box code runs at ring 0 - right next to the
silicon where normally only operating systems dare to tread. This allows
X-Box developers to code 'to the metal' when necessary, like the PS2.

"You could never do this on Windows," he adds. "And X-Box games also depend
on the video chip being an X-Box video chip. It is NOT a GeForce 3. It is
similar, but different in many subtle ways. Microsoft has exposed more of
the nVidia shader architecture in the X-Box implementation of DirectX. The
X-Box video chip also has more shader capability than the GeForce 3 does.

"So, even if, for the sake of argument, you could somehow run an X-Box game
on a PC, it wouldn't work - it would fail, because these differences are too
great to overcome. While it's not impossible to think that some developer
might want to 'lower the bar' and come up with an abstraction layer to allow
their app to be portable to both platforms, in the real world, where all the
software developers compete for the coolest titles, we're going to be taking
full advantage of the X-Box capabilities, because if we didn't our titles
would suck compared to the competition.

"From our point of view, the X-Box platform allows us to set GeForce
architecture, with pixel and vertex shaders, as the minimum (and maximum)
platform requirement, without worrying about compatibility.

"As a result, X-Box games are going to raise the bar of technology much
higher than equivalent PC games for some time to come."



Sadly some of the games I'd like to add to the list are still not out. Such as Unreal Tournament 2 for example. Halo doesn't compare to this. Not by a long shot. Theres plenty games out or coming, but I really can't be bothered going through lists of them to refresh my memory. I know what the systems can do. I know what a monitor can do. I also know what a HDTV can do. But as I said before, the level of detail brought by higher resolution will always beat a HDTV. And I will stick to that one comment and not side track as you did.

Actually, from what I've read, Unreal Championship (being developed by the original Unreal and Unreal Tournament team) is graphically superior to Unreal Tournament 2, which was farmed out to a third party who had previoudly only worked on add-on packs for Unreal Tournament. It will be interesting to see how these two games compare when they are released.

Alucard
05-22-2002, 12:13 PM
Thats a good article. I just wish I could find those cursed tech write ups for the XBox and Geforce 4, showing what each can and can't do compared to each other. Besides, that article keeps refering to a Geforce 3 when the G4 is already out and about the same price as a geforce 3. It has double the capabilities. Double the pipelines, etc. So it can do a heck more compared to a Geforce 3.
I dont know much about Unreal Championship. Haven't really looked up on it much. Though if its meant to look better then UT2, I wouldn't mind looking into this.

Bishamon
05-22-2002, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Alucard
Thats a good article. I just wish I could find those cursed tech write ups for the XBox and Geforce 4, showing what each can and can't do compared to each other. Besides, that article keeps refering to a Geforce 3 when the G4 is already out and about the same price as a geforce 3. It has double the capabilities. Double the pipelines, etc. So it can do a heck more compared to a Geforce 3.
I dont know much about Unreal Championship. Haven't really looked up on it much. Though if its meant to look better then UT2, I wouldn't mind looking into this.

That interview was done just before the GeForce 4 hit the shelves, so all the comparisons were with the GeForce 3. The problem with comparing the GeForce 4 is that the new features cannot be taken advantage of yet using Direct X, and there are other PC-based architecture hardware limitations to consider, some of which were discussed in the above interview.

Unreal 2 is the PC-based follow-up to Unreal. It's development has been 'farmed-out' to Legend Entertainment (who previously developed The Wheel of Time, Mission Critical, and the Unreal Mission Pack). Epic Games is still watching over their progress.

Unreal Championship is being developed by Epic Games themselves exclusively for the XBox and is more of a successor to Unreal Tournament; it will support up to 24 concurrent players online, simultaneous voice communication (including voice morphing, etc.).

Both titles should be released around the same time.

Alucard
05-22-2002, 01:47 PM
I'm a little still unsure on this thing you keep bringing up about DX9. I found this article that talks a little more about Geforce 4 and the XBox, which a little PS2 tossed in there as flavour. I'll just print a few lines up, but definately go and read the review at the link I post at the bottom. IT's pretty informative.


- The architecture of the NV2A (XBox) is situated between the NV20 (GeForce 3) and the NV25 (GeForce 4). It actually has a four-pixel pipeline and two vertex shaders. By comparison, the NV20 offers four pixel pipelines and one vertex shader, and the NV25 also has two vertex shaders. The graphics chip probably consists of about sixty million transistors (NV 20:57 / NV 25:63).

- t 233 MHz, the theoretic fill rate of the NV2A increases to 933 Mpixels/s, while each pipeline can produce two textures in one pass. The total memory bandwidth amounts to 6.4 GB/sec. The Pentium III will use only a maximum of 1.06 GB/sec as a result of its 133 MHz FSB, leaving 5.34 GB/sec for the GPU. This value, however, is inferior to the memory bandwidth of a GeForce 3 Ti 500, which has 7.45 GB/sec available. Remember, however, that the games are programmed only with a resolution of 640x480x32 bits. This bandwidth will lag behind with the use of anti-aliasing, a multi-sampling mode derived from NVIDIA's Quincunx. With consoles, the anti-aliasing becomes all the more important because of TV's weak resolution.

- In comparison to Playstation 2, the image quality is clearly superior. At the theoretical performance level, the graphics architecture of the Xbox is somewhat less powerful than GeForce 3 Titanium 500, except for the additional pixel shader unit, and far behind the GeForce 4 Ti 4400 and Ti 4600.

http://www4.tomshardware.com/consumer/02q1/020204/index.html

Theres alot more mundane info there about sound and stuff. The thing I'm curious in is that the Geforce 4 is superior to the XBox GPU. But you'll also notice the XBox users DirectX8. Not a modified version. Simple DX8. Now if DX9 for the PC is meant to have effects that the PC currently cannot do, I would be interested to know what theses effects are that the XBox can do and that the current Geforce 4 cannot.

Seska
05-22-2002, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Bishamon


Unreal 2 is the PC-based follow-up to Unreal. It's development has been 'farmed-out' to Legend Entertainment (who previously developed The Wheel of Time, Mission Critical, and the Unreal Mission Pack). Epic Games is still watching over their progress.

Unreal Championship is being developed by Epic Games themselves exclusively for the XBox and is more of a successor to Unreal Tournament; it will support up to 24 concurrent players online, simultaneous voice communication (including voice morphing, etc.).

Both titles should be released around the same time.

Let me just pop up in to your argument to be nitpicky. :)

Epic is in fact not developing exclusively either for PC or Xbox. Both Unreal Championship and Unreal Tournament 2003 are being developed by Digital Extremes (co-developers of the original Unreal and UT alongside Epic). Unreal II, as you said, is beind developed by Legend .

Unreal Tournament 2003 is slated for a summer release, while Championship should be out by Fall/Xmas.

From what I have read on IGN, both Championship and Tournament will be similar games in concept though different in execution. Tournament is being developed with the potential of the Geforce 4 in mind while Championship will be designed with the controls and limitations a console has to offer. I have no reason to beleive either will be sequel to the other, simply each version is tailor-made to fit the market it is aimed at, though at the end of the day both will deliver pretty much the same game with minor differences.

Bishamon
05-22-2002, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Alucard
Theres alot more mundane info there about sound and stuff. The thing I'm curious in is that the Geforce 4 is superior to the XBox GPU. But you'll also notice the XBox users DirectX8. Not a modified version. Simple DX8. Now if DX9 for the PC is meant to have effects that the PC currently cannot do, I would be interested to know what theses effects are that the XBox can do and that the current Geforce 4 cannot.

Actually, the version of Direct X used on XBox is derived from Direct X 8, but it is different. It has been optimized for XBox and includes features that will be included in Direct X 9.0 for PC. There was an interview with someone from Bungie (who developed Halo) where they discuss some of the enhancements and features that can't currently be done on a PC because of the Direct X limitation, but I'll be damned if I can find it. In the meantime, here is a small excerpt from an interview with Michael Abrash (who worked with John Carmack and has written several graphics programming books such as Zen of Graphics Programming, Zen of Code Optimization, and the Graphics Programmming Black Book. He now works is Microsoft's XBox development group):

"DirectX will be used as API of Microsoft`s console. There is not anything unexpected in this statement, however, NVIDIA will also support OpenGL as well. Actually it is not the same DirectX 8 as on PC. Once again we remind you that with XBOX it is not necessary to worry about maximal compatibility with wide range of hardware or about other programs and services of OS. Therefore DirectX was optimized for the specific hardware. All the redundant modules providing compatibility were removed; all delays between hardware and software parts were optimized as much as possible; the opportunity of access to all features of the hardware equipment was also provided."


Here is some stuff that Tom's Hardware has written regarding the XBox:

"In order to manage the data,
Microsoft has opted for a 733 MHz Pentium III processor. Some will say that
that is a bit light, considering that PC technology has reached a Pentium 4
with 2.2 GHz and that the life cycle of a console is between three to five
years. But one should not look at this problem in these terms. In a PC,
because of the open architecture of the system, and because it goes through
an interface and millions of restraints, the power of the CPU is basic. With
the console, everything depends on what it is supposed to do. In this case,
it is relieved of the main graphics work, which it assumes on the PC. If an
Xbox game (which requires T&L or shaders) is well-programmed, then it
practically doesn't even need the Pentium III. On a PC, it is not the case
because of descending compatibility. On the Xbox, the CPU processes and
sends the entered information - it is the connection between individual
elements, such as the hard disk, and it manages the artificial
intelligence."

"it is clear that the Xbox has reached a new
milestone for console graphics. But the Xbox will also be able to defend
itself against the PC for a long time because the architecture is stable
enough without having to evolve upwards or worry about
downward-compatibility."


I'll keep looking for the Bungie interview where the shading features (I think they were regarding shading) were discussed that were used in Halo but can't currently be done on a PC until DirectX 9 is available. I should bookmark these things. ;)

Alucard
05-23-2002, 01:25 AM
I've noticed alot of reports that I've read elsewhere, and that you've posted aswell, all tend to speak about the architecture. Thats a little different to a graphical feature. From what I know about video cards, the thing has to be designed to do a certain feature, not have it implemented by software. But again they all compare the XBox to the Geforce 3, when it really is a hybrid of the Geforce 3 and 4.
But if you do find that article, I would be interested in reading up on it. I've had no luck finding anything of that sort on any tech sites.