Final Fantasy XI Requires the HDD

[Twigz'N'Berries]

IGN reports that the Xbox360 version of FFXI will require the HD.
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/644/644005p1.html

This flies in the face of everything we have been told by MS and Allard so far. It will at least be in 720P as early reports stated it would be in 480P. Hopefully this is the exception to the rule...otherwise it could get ugly if developers have been given mixed messages and we, the consumer, suffer.

So kiddies, if you were planning on getting FFXI and a core system, please pony up an extra $100 for the hardcore system. Or get your gaming kicks from Oblivion.

[Dragos]

Wow, an MMORPG needs a HDD to be played? Thanks for posting this story or else I never would have known!

[Heretic Machine]

Wow, an MMORPG needs a HDD to be played? Thanks for posting this story or else I never would have known!

Ya, you might have, considering that Microsoft has been saying that the HD isn't required for any of the games.

[bapenguin]

Neato! :SHRUGS:

Like I said in another thread....we aren't going to know anything as concrete until the system comes out it seems.

[A-Team]

Ya, you might have, considering that Microsoft has been saying that the HD isn't required for any of the games.
I'm sorry, but who said the HDD wasn't required for "any of the games"?

Maybe I missed something, but I'm almost sure that Microsoft said it would be up to the developers whether they utilized the HDD or not. Also, if my mind serves me correctly, Allard and Microsoft have only said that the HDD would be required to play current-gen games.

[grunter]

Ya, you might have, considering that Microsoft has been saying that the HD isn't required for any of the games.

Admittedly I've not been keeping up with all the news stories regarding the HHD and xBox360, but I've not seen it directly quoted from MS that the HDD isn't required for any of the upcoming games.

What I've seen is MS saying is that it's up to the developers of the games to decide if the HHD is used, required, needed or not in their games.

[noxa]

It makes sense that it does - MMO's are constantly being patched and the patches can be large. I remember when I was on the PS2 Everquest beta and it would download patches to my 8mb memory card - I wonder how that's working out for them now...

One piece of insight I got from the Allard interview that I hadn't heard anyone point out was that xbox emulation would require an hdd because xbox games expected it to be there. It's a 'duh' now that I think about it, but in all the arguments about backwards compatibility requiring an hdd I never heard that mentioned.

[Kelegacy]

Neato! :SHRUGS:

Like I said in another thread....we aren't going to know anything as concrete until the system comes out it seems.

Yeah, that's great. That in and of itself is a form of deceit. But I guess that is the nature of carpe diem. I think this will just further the ongoing confusion gamers have about the 360.

Basically, if you know anyone who wants to buy the 299 console, tell them that there is no 299 console. That's what MS should have done in the first place. Next we'll hear that you need a sold-separately wireless adapter to play your wireless controller!

[karak]

I heard it's also gonna need something called the inter...inter...internet...bah. Screwballs. Who ever heard of a MMO needing the internet. What a ripoff.

[Kelegacy]

Admittedly I've not been keeping up with all the news stories regarding the HHD and xBox360, but I've not seen it directly quoted from MS that the HDD isn't required for any of the upcoming games.

What I've seen is MS saying is that it's up to the developers of the games to decide if the HHD is used, required, needed or not in their games.

That's why the fuckers should have just left the HDD in the system. It would lessen consumer confusion when buying a 360 (meaning, NONE) and if somewhere down the road a HDD is required for the 360 and you bought the core system, you wont need to purchase it in order to play the game.

And wouldn't it cause more developer headache to develop a game that uses the hard drive (like Oblivion) and not have to worry about creating the same game that doesnt use the hard drive (like Oblivion).

I'm not confused, but I am yes I'm not. Yep.

[Exodus]

omg... that's the stuff you can get from compu global hyper mega net right? :O

[Twigz'N'Berries]

I'm sorry, but who said the HDD wasn't required for "any of the games"?

Maybe I missed something, but I'm almost sure that Microsoft said it would be up to the developers whether they utilized the HDD or not. Also, if my mind serves me correctly, Allard and Microsoft have only said that the HDD would be required to play current-gen games.

Ok, so I can play the Xbox360 version on what current version console? It was announced when he stated that the HD wouldn't be standard that all games would be compatible w/ or w/out the HD.

[KDups]

I'm sorry, but who said the HDD wasn't required for "any of the games"?

Devs can certainly add HDD functionality to their games, but even Allard said that games should work even if there's no HDD present.

Which is not how this game works. Nice.

[Murmillo]

Ya, you might have, considering that Microsoft has been saying that the HD isn't required for any of the games.

True, but any resonable person who known anything about FFXI or MMO's isn't shocked by this news. I was understanding since E3, one wouldn't need a HD for any "single player" x360 games (as that is what the rumor was "don't bank on a fixed HD"), yet one would need one for the older Xbox games and x360 MMO's - and most likly we'll hear, most of the major online content. Patches - memory cards. New maps and missions - Harddrive.

Microsoft hasn't lied, again people are just looking for reasons to throw rocks are doing just that. Ignoring logic and common sense to justify a reason to hate Microsoft for every little thing they don't agree with.

[Kelegacy]

Devs can certainly add HDD functionality to their games, but even Allard said that games should work even if there's no HDD present.

Which is not how this game works. Nice.

Yeah. And "should" isn't a word rooted in clarity. It's a word that assumes. Like, now that puberty is over, I SHOULD have an adult-sized penis. But I don't. My parents lied and now Allard SHOULD be clarifying this whole thing once again. I feel that in the future of the 360, we'll see things that make you need to upgrade. Like HD-DVD games or Hard drive necessary games outside of MMOs.

Console buying choice (for the SAME fucking console) SHOULDn't be so bloody retarded.

[Venkman]

Really, for people who know about FF11, this isn't a big deal. Doesn't Final Fantasy 11 require a HDD on the PS2 also? How many of you complainers were going to buy FF11 on X360 anyway?

How do you think Square feels about the new slimline PSTwo not supporting a hard drive at all?

[A-Team]

Ok, so I can play the Xbox360 version on what current version console? It was announced when he stated that the HD wouldn't be standard that all games would be compatible w/ or w/out the HD.
Please quit telling me the same thing with different words. Either show me a quote or let it rest because that's the only reason I discounted what he said.

I even admitted to possibly missing it, so there's nothing to be won here.

[Babbster]

All I've seen so far is that Microsoft has told developers that they shouldn't count on a hard drive always being present. That's a far cry from "requiring" that any Xbox 360 game run without the hard drive, and it's a fair distance from "guaranteeing" that no game will ever require the hard drive - I would suggest that some of you whiners should find those quotes and link them or go take a nap.

[Heretic Machine]

I'm pretty sure it's here at Evil Avatar. Go find it, I'm not interested in proving anything to someone I don't even know.

By the way, the excuses you guys make for Microsoft are getting lamer.. and lamer...

[Exodus]

*shrugs* I'm getting the one with the hdd but NOT getting ffxi because it's a piece of shit game. Not getting the hdd would just be downright fucking stupid.

[Meatgortex]

Considering that you have to buy a $40 memory card for any console without a harddrive the actual difference in price is $60.

And if you plan on playing games on live and wanted the official headset your out another $20 + ~$5 is you didn't have a spare ethernet cable around.

So the difference between core and full system for an online gamer is $55-35.

I'd rather it was only $300, but I paid over 450 for the ps2 because you couldn't get one outside of a bundle at launch, and half the crap in the bundle was a lot less useful then a HD, wireless controller and headset.

[A-Team]

I'm pretty sure it's here at Evil Avatar. Go find it, I'm not interested in proving anything to someone I don't even know.

By the way, the excuses you guys make for Microsoft are getting lamer.. and lamer...
No one's making excuses. I asked for a quote that (1) doesn't exist, (2) was misinterpreted to begin with, and/or (3) exists but I miraculously missed it.

Then again, I'm talking to the same person that called DAoC "EQ 2.0".

[Kelegacy]

*shrugs* I'm getting the one with the hdd but NOT getting ffxi because it's a piece of shit game. Not getting the hdd would just be downright fucking stupid.

Agreed. But offering the same model in the first place is just as stupid. I'm sure Jack Wad Consumer will be happy to know that his year-old core model 360 doesn't support _____ (insert future game in here). MS says they are catering to the non-hardcores by offering the core system, which are the ones who know next to nothing about gaming in the first place, besides where to put the games and plug in the controller.

[Tyrant]

Agreed. But offering the same model in the first place is just as stupid. I'm sure Jack Wad Consumer will be happy to know that his year-old core model 360 doesn't support _____ (insert future game in here). MS says they are catering to the non-hardcores by offering the core system, which are the ones who know next to nothing about gaming in the first place, besides where to put the games and plug in the controller.

The same people that fail to realize that FFXI requires an HD are probably going to be the same people that will fail to realize that they have to pay a monthly fee to play said game. Either way, the game will probably go back the store.

[Dirty Harry]

The quote does indeed exsist. A-team, what is said is true. I remeber allard or one of the mircosoft PR saying that while games have the option of using the hard drive to stream content. The harddrive is not required to run games, but if you do use it you will experience faster loading.

[Kelegacy]

The quote does indeed exsist. A-team, what is said is true. I remeber allard or one of the mircosoft PR saying that while games have the option of using the hard drive to stream content. The harddrive is not required to run games, but if you do use it you will experience faster loading.

This was expressed primarily with Oblivion, but it was extended to all games as well. This is why they can offer the core model and not completely alienate the consumer: the thing will still play games regardless of hard drive or not. The HDD will only be used for secondary features like load times, so the same gaming experience can still be enjoyed.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

No one's making excuses. I asked for a quote that (1) doesn't exist, (2) was misinterpreted to begin with, and/or (3) exists but I miraculously missed it.

Then again, I'm talking to the same person that called DAoC "EQ 2.0".

Research done...
http://www.joystiq.com/entry/http://www.major-nelson.com/blogcast/2005/jallardchat-8-21-05.txt1234000610054561/

Ok, if you look, it is one of the last questions, he says this exactly.
J Allard (Expert):
Q: Why do they have the core package? Why doesn't microsoft just release the package with
the Harddrive so developers will be able to fully utilize it?
A: independent of the configurations we have at launch it was imparative that we work with developers
now to abstract the storage system because (1) the drive is removable and we want people to play even
if the drive is not present (2) another possibility is that 5 years from now that you want more storage
on the box or on the network and be able to take advantage of that. by abstracting storage in the system
we are making sure that all xbox 360 games will work on all configurations moving forward and early customers
will be able to take advantage of future scenarios like bigger drives and network storage. I may have mistaken him, but it could easily have been a misleading statement.

Now, that was a statement made yesterday. I really have no desire to look for one of the previous quotes. Either way, this is bad business. I personally couldn't care about FFXI. But there are enough Squenix fans out there (how many millions of games has this series sold) that would need to know this info. To sit there and call names to people who do remember Allard & Co saying something to this effect is just wrong. At the very least, you have to admit their statements could have easily been interpreted to mean that all 360 games will run without a HD.

That said, I'm still getting the $399 version. I don't want to own a 360 that cannot play games as well as another 360 because there is no HD attached. They have already said that some games will be optimized and have special content for HD users. I'm dying for Oblivion...but they have pretty much stated that you really should have the HD for the game. Now, I'm sure I'll be flamed for that too...

So, A-Team, there was your quote.
As for a few others, whose to say the memory card wouldn't have been sufficient?

Damn, this was posted for anyone who got the mistaken impression from Allard that all games would work on all configurations....where in hell would we get an idea like that? Since I know that the odds are that we do have some Squenix fans who this might effect.

Sorry for even posting it...

[Paranoia]

I'm pretty sure Final Fantasy XI hardcore gamers aren't that dumb to get confused about the core & premium system. Plus the fact FFXI subcribers had no problem paying monthly fees, I see no problem why they can't purchase the $399 version.

[Kefkataran]

I'm going to go ahead and agree that this seems like an obvious thing to me. How would they accomplish things like patching without an HD?

[zangster]

I'm pretty certain MS has already said that any MMORPG's would require the HD.

[Murmillo]

now I understand why most developers have a hate/love relation with gamers. They love them because with out them, they wouldn't have a job, but hate them because they are some of the most word riding cynical overbearing ultra opinionated latched on fan boys in the word. The ammount of fascism that goes on over a console is astounding.

Microsoft needs to build word of mouth to get the word going about thier new console, but with a million changes a minute that happen they day before launch, god forbid that features get dropped/changed and a wording or a misquote is taken 180 degress out of context to make it easier to throw rocks, at a system you most likly were not going to buy in the first place. Quit pretending that you know anything about the "casual" gamer. If your here on Evil Avatar, you're at least well informed (I wouldn't say smart.. .some are just rock dumb).

A game like FFXI arn't a "casual" gamers game. And while you may think this "flies in the face of everything", given that this is a MMO, it wouldn't work with out a HD in the first place. Were else are you going to stick a few hundred megs of updates and new content? Across 6 memory units. Make people buy a new $20 CD each time a new update rolls out?

I'm sorry that Microsoft didn't word it out word by word, minuscule by minuscule detail of every minuscule detail for you. I know asking this is a long shot, but please grow up and use some common sense here and there.

[A-Team]

The quote does indeed exsist. A-team, what is said is true. I remeber allard or one of the mircosoft PR saying that while games have the option of using the hard drive to stream content. The harddrive is not required to run games, but if you do use it you will experience faster loading.
Yeah, I believe the quote you're referring to is this one:

Question 14: Will developers utilize the hard drive when one is detected, or will most games be made without using it at all? Will the HD speed up load times?

Allard: Speeding up load times is one of the many things a hard drive can be used for but really it is up to the imagination of the developer. we have been talking with game developers for a while now to make sure that games will load efficiently without a hard drive present. in terms of load times, as a gamer i am super sensitive to how frustrating load times can be which is one of the reasons we put in a dual layer 12x DVD in the system to make sure gamers get great performance with or without a hard drive. one of the challenges with new optical formats when they first come out is the performance of the media which was a consideration when we decided what the optical format for Xbox 360 would be.

Twig, I agree that the name-calling is pushing all of this out of perspective, but hopefully you're not inferring that I called anyone anything. I wasn't trying to be pushy about someone getting me a quote nor was I tossing names around to get my way, but it would've been nice to put this all to rest without carrying on yet another argument about the HDD.

Going back to what Penguin was saying earlier, I think it would be best to sit back and see what happens. Regardless of who said/didn't say what, we're going to get Final Fantasy XI and the game is going to require a HDD - and this isn't going to be the last time we see an MMO require an HDD.

The way I see it, there's a few things with the X360 that we're all just going to have to settle with.

1) There are two versions of the Xbox 360
2) Upgrading the "Core System" is going to be expensive
3) The HDD is going to provide the "best gaming performance" for games that repeatedly have to stop and load
4) MMOs are not going to change with the X360. X360 purchasers that wish to partake in the action will have to sacrafice money for the Xbox Live Gold subscription or pay some form of a monthly fee to play games like FFXI from their living room.

Even at this hour, people on other boards are still complaining about Microsoft's choice to go with two SKUs, but it's out of our hands. Sure, we can express our feelings to Microsoft by writing them letters, calling them up, or signing one of those online petitions, but it's too late to change anything.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

It's not even worth it.

If you read the transcript then make up your own mind on what he said. It does go against a great deal of what has been said or implied. Either way, it was a simple post of an accurate statement.

It seems that a lot of pro 360 people get seriously pissed when someone brings up anything that can be construed as negative. What is funny is that you sit back and say things like"...misquote is taken 180 degress out of context to make it easier to throw rocks, at a system you most likly were not going to buy in the first place.".

First, you know little about me and whether I buy the system or not has nothing to do with whether that 'misquote' is something of importance to a fair amount of gamers. If you only had enough for the $299 system and planned on getting FFXI it is probably a good thing to know that it will not work with your version of the 360.

...btw, I have already preordered and paid for my $399 360. Just because I plan on buying something doesn't mean I have to lick the nuts of the company who creates the product. If they mispoke, then they can be called on it like any other company. God knows I have called Sony on it a million times.

But that wasn't what the thread was about. It was for Squenix fans who planned on buying FFXI at launch. It was just a heads up to buy the $399 version.

[mkelehan]

MS never said every game will run without the HDD. They said it's all up to the developers. Remember MS' new motto...

http://developersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopers.ytmnd.com/

...I'm so simple.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

Even at this hour, people on other boards are still complaining about Microsoft's choice to go with two SKUs, but it's out of our hands. Sure, we can express our feelings to Microsoft by writing them letters, calling them up, or signing one of those online petitions, but it's too late to change anything.

- Brandon

No offense taken. That wasn't the quote, but if you look back at my other post you will see it. I completely understand wanting to get a quote or a reference link when someone states something as a fact...this after all is a forum.

Personally, I don't like the dual SKU thing because the gamer will have a poorer experience without a HD. This is not an opinion, it is fact. Bethesda has already stated that it uses the HD heavily if it is attached and that it makes for a better game experience. Here is the direct quote:
For those of you that have been wondering, just a quick word. Oblivion does not REQUIRE a hard drive to work on Xbox 360. It will work on every Xbox 360. We would recommend you get one if you have the means because we use it heavily if you have one and it makes the game play smoother, but it is in no way a requirement.
Here is the link if you need to read it yourselves:
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=145879

I have accepted it as a necessary evil that the dual sku strategy had to be implemented. Hopefully it will not hurt 360 sales as I would like to see a more level playing field between Sony, MS and Nintendo (but I don't really see Nintendo as the competitor it once was). The only people who suffer will be the ones who buy the $299 system and that seems kind of sad. But better to have a $299 360 than none at all...

[Twigz'N'Berries]

MS never said every game will run without the HDD. They said it's all up to the developers. Remember MS' new motto...

http://developersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopers.ytmnd.com/

...I'm so simple.

Ok, please read the transcript from yesterday in its entirety. When he states that 'all 360 games will work on all configurations', it is a very real possibility that statement can be taken to mean 'all 360 games will work on all configurations'.

http://www.major-nelson.com/blogcast/2005/jallardchat-8-21-05.txt
J Allard (Expert):
Q: Why do they have the core package? Why doesn't microsoft just release the package with the Harddrive so developers will be able to fully utilize it?
A: independent of the configurations we have at launch it was imparative that we work with developers now to abstract the storage system because (1) the drive is removable and we want people to play even if the drive is not present (2) another possibility is that 5 years from now that you want more storage on the box or on the network and be able to take advantage of that. by abstracting storage in the system we are making sure that all xbox 360 games will work on all configurations moving forward and early customers will be able to take advantage of future scenarios like bigger drives and network storage.

Sorry for the crappy super extended post, but I wanted people to see the quote it in its entirety.
For everyone who asked how the game was supposed to run without an HD, network storage is something Allard mentions.
I just wished people could discuss games without become so upset.

[Xerxes]

Why are people still whining about this... YOU aren't going to by $299 version, you SUPPOSEDLY know better than that... It's for the misinformed... It's for the non-gamer who wants to play games... Not all developers used it for too many purposes aside from saves, downloads, soundtracks... Caching was not something everyone did...

MMO games need hard drives, fact of life and FFXI isn't going to be the only one on this system...

I would buy a $399 cause I'm gamer(who even goes into forums spending too much time), I intend to play online, save multiple saves, wireless controller ain't shabby, want a dvd remote, do my own soundtracks, download content, and might give a xbox 360 mmo a shot (that marvel one has my brow raised)...

My brother, older guy would end up with cheap version because he'd only want to play two or three games over and over again... I mean he only plays my copy of links and nfl 2k5... He ain't LIVE ready or much into anything else the $399 offers... Note I bought him a xbox cause he'd always come visit to play mines, til then he wasn't a big gamer(still isn't really)...

Why be mad at microsoft for bringing more people into the fold...

[Kefkataran]

They love them because with out them, they wouldn't have a job, but hate them because they are some of the most word riding cynical overbearing ultra opinionated latched on fan boys in the word.

True, if sometimes seemingly overstated. But that's sadly true of any and all geek mediums. The guys just get too attached to easily.

The ammount of fascism that goes on over a console is astounding.

Fascism is a bad word choice there. Or nonsensical at best.

[Cyrano]

I won’t read Xerxes's post. It’s too annoying. Sentences should be separated by periods, not ellipses.

Ta-dah! The market for the 360 is fragmented. Some games will run on either system, while some will run only on the 360 and not the three-shitty ("core system"). Great strategy!

[Twigz'N'Berries]

I won’t read Xerxes's post. It’s too annoying. Sentences should be separated by periods, not ellipses.

Ta-dah! The market for the 360 is fragmented. Some games will run on either system, while some will run only on the 360 and not the three-shitty ("core system"). Great strategy!
Exactly. All I'm saying is that if without a HD the games run poorly, then all systems should come with the HD.

I understand what MS was trying to do and I appreciate it. But you can't split the quality of games between two systems. But, I assume MS has done their research on it. I hope MS does well.

What I don't like is where people get pissy just because you point out an possible marketing issue.

[Murmillo]

I won’t read Xerxes's post. It’s too annoying. Sentences should be separated by periods, not ellipses.

Ta-dah! The market for the 360 is fragmented. Some games will run on either system, while some will run only on the 360 and not the three-shitty ("core system"). Great strategy!

Ta-dah! FFXI hasn't done anything different with the x360 then it needed the otherwise useless hard drive for the PS2.

I'll admit, this so far is the only 'first' game to break the non-harddrive rule, but given the same history over on the PS2 side and that its a MMO, it's worth using a little common sense to give it a pass as 'expected' and nothing to go all crazy over.

Now, should other non MMO games come along and start doing this (say- Halo 3) then I would then start to get very annoyed with Microsoft as they would be abusing thier tactics on un-informed "casual" gamers who don't see a need for Live/custom music/etc.etc, unless they drop the hard drive down to like $40-$50 (same as the memory unit).

I remember a lot of my non hard core gaming friends who got an xbox and still bought a memory unit because they didn't understand this whole "hard drive" = really big save card deal. Talking to them now, they are only interested in the newest Madden, NFS or even PGR3, to them a $100 x360 harddrive would be useless.
Might even be interested in Ridge Racer, maybe even that new Dead or Alive.. still two games that 'don't' need a hard drive.

They dont care about Oblivion, they don't care about FFXI (the only two currently really should have or needing a hard drive - repectivelly)

They don't need any of the DVD remote options or a headset because they don't watch movies on thier current xbox, nor do they ever use live. Most of them still have dial up for thier computers.

The only people I see really effected by this 'market split' SO FAR (all could change), are the younger generation who are interested in FFXI, have thier clueless parents get them a 'core' system for christmas and not be able to play the game unless they spend thier own money or wait till the parents get them the hard drive.

[Xerxes]

Oh... Snapz... I'm... Being... Annoying... Not... Typing... By... The... Book... Like... Someone... With... Commm... Sense...

My feelings are so hurt because my post wasn't read by you Cyrano, very hurt indeed.

[Heretic Machine]

A game like FFXI arn't a "casual" gamers game.

Keep telling yourself that.

"Hardcore" gamers would play a different (and much better) MMO. The only people who would play FFXI are what I consider, casual gamers, people who buy games based on hype or a brand. These guys are more interested in the whole "this looks like anime!" thing than actual gameplay mechanics. These guys also make up the bulk of the gaming populance, IMO.

People who only play one or two games once in a blue moon aren't gamers, they are people who happen to have access to video games. That'd be like calling a person who happesn to look at ESPN for a few seconds a, "casual sports-fan." These don't make up the largest portion of the gaming market, though they do contribute to sales considerably. But your odds of selling them a new game are very slim.

[Xerxes]

Perigon... In terms of MMO there isn't other games for xbox 360 yet... So only gamers will be playing it... Not you normies looking for quick fixes....

[bapenguin]

2 Things...

1) Patches and Live updates can be stored on a memory card
2) There is no 299 system. It's a MARKETING ploy. Microsoft's XBox 360 is the 399 package. With things like this, they are forcing the gamers to get the system THEY want you to have, but they NEED to launch at the 299 price point.

[Kefkataran]

1) Patches and Live updates can be stored on a memory card

You'd have to have a mighty big memory card to store very many patches. This seems unlikely to work at best.

[Murmillo]

2 Things...

1) Patches and Live updates can be stored on a memory card


Again, there is a very BIG *hee hee* difference between a 1-5Mb patches here and there (which most Live patches are) and the much bigger hundred of Mb updates that a MMO often put out.

Now tell me how your going to cram a few hundred Mb worth of MMO updates into a 64Mb Memory card... just curious to know.

[mister_slim]

Didn't we have this argument last week? And the week before that?
You'd have to have a mighty big memory card to store very many patches. This seems unlikely to work at best.
64 MB seems like it would hold a fair number of patches.

[Kefkataran]

64 MB seems like it would hold a fair number of patches.

MMORPG patches? I think you and I must play very different MMOs. I haven't done much FFXI, but I know the average CoH or WoW patch is usually close to 100 megs. Hell, I had a patch on the CoV beta last night that was 260.

[jwbxx]

FF11 is garbage. If you buy this game for the xbox360 you must have been a huge fan of matrix online and other crappy mmos like that.

[Rangoth]

I like MxO :P

[Kefkataran]

FF11 is garbage. If you buy this game for the xbox360 you must have been a huge fan of matrix online and other crappy mmos like that.

While I agree that FF11 is garbage and Matrix Online is crap, I boggle at the logic you use to say anyone who buys FF11 for Xbox 360 must've been a fan of the Matrix.

[jwbxx]

Well i should of said, if you get ff11 on the xbox360 you must be a fan of crappy mmos or you must have poor taste in games.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

Perigon... In terms of MMO there isn't other games for xbox 360 yet... So only gamers will be playing it... Not you normies looking for quick fixes....

Ok, take a look at Huxley...that one most likely is going to need a HD to run. So all those with a core system will most likely need a HD. Now, can anyone point me to where Allard said that all MMOs will need a HD? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that games like GoW or Quake 4 may take a little hit if there is no HD present.

So I don't get flamed, that was speculation. But take a look at those games, they look pretty sweet.

[Murmillo]

jwbxx, could you please stop with the retarded posts. This isn't about if you like FFXI or not - or taste in games. The debate is if Allard "lied" about the all games/no-HD debate, or if was an slip of the mind ommission that there will be a few games, that have no choice but require HD because of thier complex nature (like MMO's).

As I said before, if a HD requirement is stuck to only MMO's, then it was a general ommission, but if other games start requiring a HD for no fucking reason other then to sell a $100 HD, then people are going to get really pissed; and then I'll agree with the general masses that Microsoft is "doing it again" and sticking it to the consumer to pad Bill's pockets.

So quit padding your post count with retarded gradeschool attacks.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

jwbxx, could you please stop with the retarded posts. This isn't about if you like FFXI or not - or taste in games. The debate is if Allard "lied" about the all games/no-HD debate, or if was an slip of the mind ommission that there will be a few games, that have no choice but require HD because of thier complex nature (like MMO's).

As I said before, if a HD requirement is stuck to only MMO's, then it was a general ommission, but if other games start requiring a HD for no fucking reason other then to sell a $100 HD, then people are going to get really pissed; and then I'll agree with the general masses that Microsoft is "doing it again" and sticking it to the consumer to pad Bill's pockets.

So quit padding your post count with retarded gradeschool attacks.

...flame on...

[Ninja 20XX]

Allard alluded in the online chat that developers were being required make sure 360 games were able to function without the hard drive. That apparently doesn't mean, however, that developers couldn't utilize the HDD, if they chose - they just have to make sure the games still run without it.

So, without a HDD, perhaps some 360 games will have longer loading times or more frequent loads than they do with a HDD attached to the console. How many developers will go to the trouble of incorporating HDD support?

Depends on the demographics. There will be a lot more 360s with a HDD than without for the forseeable future. The Core System isn't really going to come into play until they can drive the price down to make it more appealing to the non-online, more casual gaming crowd (like around $199 or so) who doesn't need a HDD, and if they don't have a HDD and don't know the difference between the performance advantage of having a HDD on their Core System 360, then they're probably not going to complain too much.

And in any case, if you intentionally buy the budget version of any appliance, you got no right bitching it's not fair you didn't get all the bells and whistles because you specifically chose the rock bottom price.

If you bought the $30 DVD player from Wal-Mart and grumble because you didn't get all the functionality of the $99 Sony model on the shelf above it, that was your choice. Price was more important to you than features. That's why cars have base models and fully loaded ones and the price tags are vastly different.

MS is specifically trying to get developers away from tying the HDD too heavily as a requirement. Remember all the rumors of some sort of iPod-like HDD for the 360 that would function as a stand alone music player as well as a HDD for game saves, downloads, and such?

That's probably going to happen at some point - remember, custom soundtracks are now enabled in all 360 games at the hardware level, not because developers choose to incorporate it (or disable it if they paid big $$$ for a exclusive soundtrack that they want you to listen to).

So what happens if I get one of those 'XPods' and decide to take it with me to work, but my wife wants to play a 360 game? Well, if we don't have a seperate memory unit, she's kind of screwed with not being able to save game data, but if we do have a seperate MU, as long as the game functions without the HDD, she'll just have to deal with any shortcomings in terms of loading times or performance hits. It's that, or she doesn't play the game.

Online storage via Live for game save data may be another option down the road, so if someone's going to remove the 360 HDD and they don't have a memory card handy, they could just transfer save data from the HDD to a Live server for temporary storage. If you're going to give people a removable hard drive and give them a valid reason to actually remove the HDD, like the 'XPod' music player, you want to make sure that other people in the household can still use the console if they want.

So people with the Core System won't be able to play FF XI or other MMO games - odds are that audience who would specifically buy the Core System probably doesn't play MMO games, anyway. If they don't want to shell out the extra for the HDD, they sure aren't going to want to pay monthly subscription fees for each of those games, either.

This 'Three Shitty' stuff is getting old. MS is trying something different by incorporating different models for 360 with different features and different price points, just like they tried something different by putting a HDD in every Xbox - which, apparently, is a reason why we're not getting easy backwards compatibility. You learn from your mistakes, so likely BC won't be as big of a hurdle in the third Xbox.

Developers who are going to intentionally require the HDD are making a decision to possibly cut their 360 games off from a more frugal audience down the road who does want a cheaper, HDD-less Core System. Most games don't seem to have a long shelf life like that, so it may be more important to them to appeal to the larger numbers of 360 owners who do have a 360 with a HDD right now than all the anticipated Core System owners three or four years from now.

They're not going to design, say, Halo 3 so you have to have a HDD just to sell the HDD as a peripheral. They want the audience to whom price is a major concern to be able to buy a cheap 360 and play Halo 3 at some point - and more likely than not, these people didn't buy an Xbox and didn't stand in line at midnight for a copy of Halo 2, and didn't pay $50 for an Xbox Live subscription.

That's who the Core System is for, and if they have to deal with longer load times on Halo 3 because they chose not to buy the more expensive 360 with the HDD, or not be able to fit all the downloadable content for Halo 3 on their 64 MB memory unit, that was their choice.

[Murmillo]

They're not going to design, say, Halo 3 so you have to have a HDD just to sell the HDD as a peripheral. They want the audience to whom price is a major concern to be able to buy a cheap 360 and play Halo 3 at some point - and more likely than not, these people didn't buy an Xbox and didn't stand in line at midnight for a copy of Halo 2, and didn't pay $50 for an Xbox Live subscription.

That's who the Core System is for, and if they have to deal with longer load times on Halo 3 because they chose not to buy the more expensive 360 with the HDD, or not be able to fit all the downloadable content for Halo 3 on their 64 MB memory unit, that was their choice.

But if they most likely don't have Live, they most likely won't have any downloadable content - unless they get it from an OXM disk. But again, do "casual" gamers subscribe to OXM?
Just a nit pick out of an other wise damn good post! A+ :eek:

Thumbs up. Very good points, view and opinion.

[Ninja 20XX]

They may not have broadband, but they do have access to Live without paying for it with a Silver membership. If they know someone who does have a broadband connection, all they have to do is take their console over, access Live, and nab the DC. These types of gamers tend to play and buy less games so DC means even more to them, in a sense.

The bottom line is that the HDD in the Xbox is a barrier that's going to keep MS from riding out price drops and catching the real low-end, casual market - the people who were buying the PSones long after publishers stopped supporting the platform in any meaningful way. The price, plus a lot of budget friendly games, was the selling point - it wasn't cutting edge, but it was cheap, and there were still games worth playing.

Sony could continue to reconfigure the PS2 to get the price even lower - drop the networking, even the USB ports. You'll never see a $49.99 Xbox, because that would barely cover the HDD alone.

Most of these really 'low-end' gamers end up being kids who had the console bought for them by a budget-minded parent, but it builds brand loyalty in the long run. The thirteen year old who got a PSone for Christmas may have decided to buy himself a PS2 down the road when he can get a job and make his own purchases. A couple years later, he's in the workforce and he can buy a PS3 at launch. He might not be into games enough to buy into more than one platform, but he transitioned from someone who was behind the curve to an early adopter.

The 360 will be able to be more competitive in that respect, it's about growing the Xbox brand into new demographics that the original Xbox may not be able to penetrate.

[MrMeatshake]

blah.

what's happened 2 the post-length around here recently? and i'm sure if i'd read any of them, they wouldn't have included any fawning fanboism or rediculous claims. :p

EDIT: i've now read some of ninja's post, and i retract my criticism ;) - thanks Murmillo for your post 'review' - i'd already dismissed this as a 'rant' due to the length of the post! we need a peer review system /. (http://slashdot.org/) style :cool:.

i've written some huge posts myself, but i'm very aware no-one will read them. i hope all these 'authors' are similarly aware. :rolleyes:

[Twigz'N'Berries]

The 360 will be able to be more competitive in that respect, it's about growing the Xbox brand into new demographics that the original Xbox may not be able to penetrate.

Good post.
I do disagree with one thing you have mentioned. If it were about growing the brand, they should have eliminated the choice. Systems have always done better when their was a simple choice for the consumer. Sega really taught us a lesson on this one. Sega was dominant with their Genesis and had actually had more of a marketshare than the SNES. One of its selling points was that you could buy an adapter and play your all but three of your old sega games (Carmen Sandiego, some 'Penguin game' and one other title were not compatible). This was a selling point for me and a lot of others. But when they introduced the Sega CD, 32X and then the Saturn, it soured their fanbase because their core group was now fragmented. Because Sega had so many systems out on the market, the consumer was unsure of which one to support and thusly ended up not supporting any of them that well. Developers felt the same way.
Which led in part to the demise of the Dreamcast. Many people still had that taste in their mouth of having bought a system that no supported from Sega. So many people stayed away from the system. When Sony began to tell people that the Dreamcast was dead and that its new system would dominate the market, people who had bought the PS1 had gotten a lot of mileage out of it and they knew that they could play their old games on it too. What they got out of that was that theyw were upgrading hardware and getting to keep their old software...with the benefits of a company that was simple in strategy. They didn't monkey around with the core PS2 system until well into its 7-8th year when the HD came out and then the slimversion came out. Every game produced for the PS2 would work (and work the same) on every other PS2. This ensured that everyone was getting the same experience and had the same experience for a 7 year period. Then it began adding other peripherals. Sony didn't immediately try to launch a new system when the Xbox came out....or even drop its price for that matter. It maintained that it had exclusive content, a wealth of great games and a continued link back to the origanl PS1.
Now with the 360, you lose a lot of that. Not all games will play the same without the harddrive. So one gamers experience will not necessarily be the same as another gamers experience. There will be games from day one that require a HD...a component missing in some 360s. From day one, the experience will be fragmented. Add to this that not all games will be backwards compatible. So if you had the original Xbox, you may have one of your favorite (albeit maybe not as popular) game relagated to a low priority on the conversion list. This does little to engender loyalty.
I know it seems like some gamers are feeling a little wary of the 360 because this situation is somewhat familiar to them. If you feel I'm incorrect, ask how many people are now going to wait a little before buying their 360. I know that the number went up enough that Allard felt he had to do damage control. If you look at most game sites, there will be people who say they are going to wait or that they are disappointed with the two tiered launch.
I understand the dual sku and don't care for it much. But it won't effect me unless the 360 does not do well because of marketing decisions...which means PS3 gets a lot more exclusives and more developers walk away from developing for the system.

[Rangoth]

There is just one thing Twigz that I would like to note. I do agree with much of what you had to say however, the people who were gamers in the Sega CD/32X era are now working adults. Yes, I understand they are not the only audience however initial system launches are typically for more active gamers. Since these children are now adults they will have their own money to spend.

That being said, the dual SKU thing is seriously FUBAR. If they needed to save money on the system another way should of been found.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

There is just one thing Twigz that I would like to note. I do agree with much of what you had to say however, the people who were gamers in the Sega CD/32X era are now working adults. Yes, I understand they are not the only audience however initial system launches are typically for more active gamers. Since these children are now adults they will have their own money to spend.

That being said, the dual SKU thing is seriously FUBAR. If they needed to save money on the system another way should of been found.

Exactly!! They are adults and now will have their own money to spend...and they will remember the company that let them down when they spent that money in the past.

I know I used to love Sega, but today I look at their products and weep because they are sub-par. I didn't buy the Dreamcast until it was on clearance for $35 because of all the crap that happened with the 32x/CD/Saturn.

[netcraazzy]

Nothing is ever set in stone when it comes to technology folks. FFXI has been around for a while and previous implementations of the game all had access to a HHD. In my mind things went down something like this:

Microsoft: Hey Square/Enix could you guys make some of your games for 360? Pretty pretty please? With lots of Bill Gates money on top?
Squenix: Hmmm well we might be interested in porting FFXI to 360.
Microsoft: That's one of those games that everybody was buying a Playstation for last generation right? Awsome!
Squenix: Yeah, but...uh there's one problem. The game always had a harddrive in the past and we see that you want your games to work without a harddrive, that's just not going to happen if you want FFXI on 360.
Microsoft: Oh that silly little rule. We'll let this one slide, please please please make more of your games for our system that people will blindly purchase just for the sake of the name.

I'm sure things happened a little differently but that's how I see them :p

[Ninja 20XX]

I think the dual-SKU is a good compromise. Had there been no option for a HDD, or if it wasn't bundled with a number of items to make it a decent value, that would've alienated their core fanbase.

I want a HDD for really no other reason than to not have to mess with memory cards. $40 for 64 MB and . . . well, you have to break down the items in the premium SKU and think if you would've bought them seperately or not, and I would've bought component cables and a Live headset, anyway, so that's $60 there . . . which means I get a 20 GB memory unit for $40, and I'm sure I'll end up using the 360 for a DVD player because I can get game invites, so the remote's not totally useless.

Everyone has to do the math for themselves, but just the same, I'm sure that exact selection of extras in the $399 premium isn't just random things they decided to toss in. That's probably careful market research - the 360 early adopter is going to be a Live player, has at least a component video monitor, probably would use the DVD playback so they can get game invites, so we'll toss those things in to defray the cost of paying extra for the HDD. That way they're not upsetting the hardcore too much and it's not hindering their ability to eventually downplay the HDD.

With a casual crowd, I don't think performance is a huge issue, if they end up suffering longer load times or what not - they might not even be aware there is a performance issue. They're accustomed to saving games on memory cards, and that's the model they're using for the 360. The games they're not going to get without the HDD are ones they may not even really want. Casual gamers will be far more interested in 360 versions of Halo or Forza than Huxley or FF XI.

By keeping it external and a modular sort of thing, people can upgrade if they change their minds, and like I said earlier, if they can come up with a combo music player / HDD thing and have it compete on a price / feature level with other music players, people will buy it. "So I can use this like an iPod and it's a big ass memory card for my Xbox? For $99? Sold."

MS is catching a lot of flack for not pushing the HDD as a standard feature, but then, neither is Sony or Nintendo. I doubt there will even be a HDD option for the PS3 at launch, that'll come later. The PS2 HDD was a joke, no North American devs even bothered to toss in a couple lines of code so you could save game files directly to it, not even first-party titles.

Then again, that didn't really seem to hamper the PS2's appeal, everyone was happy with $20 8 MB memory cards.

Some developers will utilize it more directly on the 360, the same way some did on the Xbox - the number of Core Systems floating around in the next couple years will be slim. I checked in at the local EB Games today on my 360 pre-order, which I made before the whole pricing announcement, to make sure I was getting the $399 premium, and that's what they had me down for without bothering to ask. The pre-order display on the counter listed the price as $399, there wasn't anything anywhere to even indicate there was two options. The only people who will be getting the Core in the next year or so will be those who are seeking it out or have to settle with the Core because the other one is sold out.

Right now, the Core is a big mind fake in a way, because we've seen how people reacted to $399, instead of doing the math and looking at everything that they're getting, they wigged out. That's what people are expecting, and they got it - with some strings attached, to be sure, but I doubt anyone who isn't going to read the 'fine print' and think things through will be buying one for $399 or $299.

The difference is when it's time for the third Xbox, they can check off the 'solve backwards compatibility issues' on the to-do list because the HDD isn't going to be a big hurdle, and they've probably worked out things legally with ATI so if they do have to switch partners, it's not like the mess with nVidia.


So if you had the original Xbox, you may have one of your favorite (albeit maybe not as popular) game relagated to a low priority on the conversion list.


I think a bigger issue is it looks like there's not going to be a way to transfer save files from the Xbox to the 360, so unless you're willing to start a game from scratch and wipe out all your progress just to play it on the 360 . . . I know I'm not. I barely get time to play games through once, and my time is worth more than $70 or whatever I can get for my Xbox.

That's a good example, though, because it wasn't something they had really planned on when they were putting together the original Xbox, BC was largely something new Sony was trying, and while it existed in other forms earlier, it was still pretty untested on that scale - had MS known then what a big deal BC was going to be to consumers now, they'd probably have done some things differently. But if they don't break the cycle with the 360, it'll be the same thing in five years.

It's the whole budget thing, I'm sure MS could've come to some sort of financial agreement with nVidia and dropped in BC at the hardware level to make things easier, but certainly not cheaper. And if it came down to toning some part of the 360's capabilities down just to cover the cost of playing Xbox games - I'll just keep my Xbox. I want killer 360 games more than I want the ability to play five year old Xbox games and some freed-up space in my entertainment center.

That's really the issue, people want everything and the kitchen sink for $299.99, not a penny more, and just because it's Microsoft, money is no object.


I'm sure things happened a little differently but that's how I see them


Square's in it for the money. They're planning on making the majority of their profits from online gaming within the next few years, and to do that, they're not going to let any stone unturned. Console gamers' money spends just as well as PC gamers, ditto with Xbox and PlayStation fans.

[Cyrano]

The casual gamers Microsoft is targetting with the Xbox 360 "Core" would be better off buying an Xbox or PS2. Those systems have huge libraries of games, many for low prices. If you're willing to get a console at launch for $300 with only a small launch library of full price games, I think you qualify as "hardcore".

Better still, Microsoft could have gone with a traditional hard drive instead of the expansive removable one, charging $350 or so for a single SKU. They could have kicked Sony's ass.

[Ninja 20XX]

The casual gamers Microsoft is targetting with the Xbox 360 "Core" would be better off buying an Xbox or PS2.


That's true - but they're not specifically targeting the casual gamers yet, because it's unlikely they're going to pay $299 for any game console.

$199, $149, $99 are the magic numbers there, and a HDD as a fixed standard makes it that much tougher for MS to hit those sweet spots in sticker price with the 360. Casual gamers generally don't buy as many games as hardcore gamers do to help even out any finiancial losses between the hardware manufacturing costs and the retail price, so it's very important to do everything possible to keep those costs in check.


Better still, Microsoft could have gone with a traditional hard drive instead of the expansive removable one, charging $350 or so for a single SKU. They could have kicked Sony's ass.


There's 90 million reasons that scenario didn't happen, and they all have 'PlayStation 2' written on them. Literally.

Best selling hardware - take both the competitors, add them together, double that, and Sony still 'wins'. Lowest specs of the three, almost zero support for a hard drive. In the long run, Sony made more money selling 8 MB flash memory cards at $20 - $30 a pop than they would've a HDD.

MS is being very mindful of who did the ass kicking in this round and is trying to find ways to avoid that sort of beating in the next. If the 360 doesn't at least move thirty or forty million units in its lifespan, then it's failed to expand upon the Xbox brand, and regardless of quality and number of games, it's not going to do that without being more competitive in pricing.

Eventually the PS2 is going to go to $99, probably around the time the PS3 launches. People always ask "how many more PS2s are they going to sell" - well, it still hasn't caught up to the original PlayStation in sales, and the original PlayStation did very well during the last transition, it outsold both the Xbox and Gamecube combined during their North American launch periods due to ultra-competitive pricing aimed at casual gamers who weren't buying a new console and full-priced games.

The Xbox isn't going to follow suit, at $99 MS would take huge losses, more than it would be worth.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

Eventually the PS2 is going to go to $99, probably around the time the PS3 launches. People always ask "how many more PS2s are they going to sell" - well, it still hasn't caught up to the original PlayStation in sales, and the original PlayStation did very well during the last transition, it outsold both the Xbox and Gamecube combined during their North American launch periods due to ultra-competitive pricing aimed at casual gamers who weren't buying a new console and full-priced games.

The Xbox isn't going to follow suit, at $99 MS would take huge losses, more than it would be worth.

I agree with most of that...
Xbox 1 production is slated to stop later this year. So, no new xbox 1s will be produced after this year (unless it will be by a third party, but I have never heard of this happening). Which leaves the xbox1 consumer with 4 choices:
1) Repair the old system (assuming they have one and it breaks)
2) Hunt down one of the remaining 'new' xboxes on store shelves
3) Buy a used xbox
4) Buy a 360 and hope the games you have are compatible

Speculation
I personally expect both the PS2 and the PSP to drop in price when MS launches the 360. If not right when it launches, it will be done if the 360s has strong sales within a month (just in time for Xmas). Since the PS3 won't be available yet, I fully expect Sony to try to slow any momentum the 360 has by lowering the price of the offerings of their other two products.

[Ninja 20XX]

I think Sony already nixed the idea of dropping the PS2 this year, which is what everyone in the retail sector was anticipating.

Gates did mention that bit about 'licensing Xbox technology' to outside firms a while back, which did seem a bit cryptic. Since the Xbox has to have a HDD, maybe someone will step in and put out some kind of Xbox / DVR hybrid.

MS is supposed to be in really tight with Samsung as a promotional partner.

[mister_slim]

PS1 shipped 2.5 million units in '04, btw.

[Twigz'N'Berries]

I think Sony already nixed the idea of dropping the PS2 this year, which is what everyone in the retail sector was anticipating.

Gates did mention that bit about 'licensing Xbox technology' to outside firms a while back, which did seem a bit cryptic. Since the Xbox has to have a HDD, maybe someone will step in and put out some kind of Xbox / DVR hybrid.

MS is supposed to be in really tight with Samsung as a promotional partner.

Maybe they won't drop the PS2 price...but I wouldn't bet on it. They will research it and make a decision. If they think it will help slow the spread of 360s, but not cut too deeply into profits, I'd count on it happening.