Microsoft Testing "Variety" of new Xbox Prototypes - Report

See it here.

If true it's good news as I wasn't totally sure they would stay in the console market. And also, a wireless chip?

Among the prototypes are modular ones that can be upgraded like a PC.

"Some of the prototypes have been tested with upgraded components you'd use to improve the performance of a PC gaming rig," the report said.

Making matters potentially more interesting, however, is that NeoGAF member ekim recently found new Federal Communications Commission filings that show Microsoft
is experimenting with a new Xbox One wireless chip. Interestingly, the Microsoft-FCC non-disclosure agreement ends on June 25, which is not even two weeks after Microsoft's
briefing at E3 this year.

:)

 

Microsoft working on Google Glass rival

Via CVG

This could be interesting, but with Google Glass already ahead of the curve and Oculus Rift in the gaming sphere, It desn't appear MSFT has much room to enter the competition.

 

Microsoft working on Xbox 360 replacement?

[quote user="SnailUK"]

Lets not forget, Microsoft will need to give developers prototype hardware, and development tools, at least a year in advance of the console release



[/quote]



They already have.....

 

Also,
this is what the competition is doing with the Neo. Do you think MS need to take a similar approach if true?

This will be a very interesting E3 to say the least.

 

Just a mess and more work for devs.

2 different game versions on the same disc,to be playable on the same current gen console brand.

All of this just to have most games upscaled in 4K with a limited frame-rate.(all these features aren't mandatory)

Not worth the time and money for devs but also for us consumers.

Better to wait for a real next gen instead of jumping on a half baked console without exclusives and short lifecycle.

 

"If true it's good news as I wasn't totally sure they would stay in the console market."

Why would you be unsure about them staying in the console market? Serious question.

As for updating the consoles I think this is a nice step really. You can still write code that will work on both. Basically the game plays fine on the older unit. The newer unit will just be able to push more graphically. I have multiple PCs here. They
will all play a game such as the Division. But my personal rig will run it at 4k with decent settings and looks much better compared to the weakest on. The weakest one still runs the game and looks good on the 1080 monitor just not as good. The one that
is in the middle will put out 1080 better than the weaker one but has no shot of getting a good enough frame rate or settings at anything higher.

Really, programming for PC has a ton of hardware to work on and it works. These upgraded console ideas would just have that older model and the newer one. Much easier target and really not much of a difference in work. The architecture will be the same.

Another good thing about upgrading consoles with a refresh ever 2-3 years is that the old consoles are fine. The newer ones are just better. Nothing wrong with that. Of course I would play like this. Lets start by pointing out that these consoles are
going to last 5 years, 6 at most. They are already lagging pretty badly. So they do a console update and both play games. The newer one cost more, of course, and the older is a cheaper model. Eventually they phase out selling the cheaper model and bring
another update. Now, the first update was 3 years. The second update was 3 years. So we have 6 years already. At this point we have:

In the original scenario they would launch a new console. The old console would see only a trickle of games for a little while longer or, possibly, nothing at all.

In the new scenario the original still plays the games. You just do not have the features that the newer console now has. But you can still play. And even if they move beyond that console at that point and it no longer is viable you have gotten 6 years
of game launches. So the console still had that 6 year life span.

With the second scenario they could push past the 6 years because they could make the games scalable. It is entirely possible to write software that works on older hardware but needs newer hardware for more advanced features. Not a real big thing. There
would be no "2 versions of the same game" or anything like that.

Imagine the 360 shared an architecture with the One. The 360 was getting the games just as the One. The One just has improved features. This as opposed to having a whole new console that is separate announced. Splitting the Live install base. Just seems
that updating the console every 2-3 years (3 is probably best) is a great option.

I feel these consoles, at least the One, is becoming a way to use the Xbox and Live platform. So they will keep this lower cost and "easier" option for those that want it. Xbox and Live should eventually integrate across PC/Console/Mobile.

 

if they start fragmenting consoles, then its time to really consider giving it up, the cost alone that devs need to recoup by placing extra content on discs and more programming will be pushed onto the consumer. then end of consoles as we know them is numbered,
pc may now be the better platform.

 

^^ I agree with you but ill wait and see. They could come up with a really good idea plus I need to see what this wireless chip is all about.

 

Good they need to test the next Xbox. 8 year cycles are no good. MS has UWA so on this side of the fence programming 2 different versions isn't a big deal. I'll just say that these prototypes need to be better than what the Neo specs are to make it worth
it though. I'd just stick with this Xboxone otherwise because I have no problem how my games look on it right now.

 

Brand from what I read the wireless chip is only an upgrade of the one already fitted, it just had to be registered because its Wi Fi tech and that stuff has to be registered and approved so it doesn't conflict with other devices/protocols. I don't think
its anything new. Could be wrong though....

 

Said it before but the day consoles become upgradable is the day I will stop gaming. It just goes against everything a console is meant to be, if I wanted the best graphics and performance I would be gaming on a PC.

 

^My thoughts as well pretty much...

 

I only trust sources from Microsoft's websites or their official Xbox YouTube channel. Gamespot isn't one of them.

I actually invested in a gaming desktop with 6th gen Intel Core i7 6700k CPU (4Ghz base speed, turbo boost to 4.2Ghz, can be unlocked to achieve higher speeds, 8MB Cache, 4 cores, 8 threads), 16GB DDR4 2400Mhz RAM, and Sapphire AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB vRAM
GDDR5 GPU with bandwidth of 384Gb/s which thrashes PS4's GDDR5 bandwidth of 176GB/s. I decided to get the PC from a special New Zealand computer company so that I can play The Sims 4, Cities Skylines, and Planet Coaster (I have the Alpha version of Planet
Coaster. The game is AMAZING! me love heaps!). And the hardware can cope easily with playing those games in 1920x1080 HIGH settings. It can even go for 4k since the R9 390 has 8GB vRAM GDDR5 with 384GB/s I read one report it has slightly higher bandwidth than
the GTX Titan GPU. Not go for 4GB GTX 970 as Nvidia had a legal issue that the GTX 970 only has 3.5GB super fast memory, the last 0.5GB memory in the 4GB GPU is very slow memory. R9 is FULLY Direct X12 compatible and has a whopping 8GB vRAM.

 

I still prefer them not to make upgradeable Xbox 1's. Consoles have enjoyed the debacle which is all to common with PCs... "can my PC run this?" and system requirements. Screamride and Kinect Sports Rivals look AMAZING on Xbox 1 and that's coming from me.
Another thing that's good is genuine Xbox 360 and Xbox 1 consoles don't get viruses. Genuine reports of them on genuine consoles have been negligible and you don't need to visit naughty sites to get a virus. And it's super fun.

And also, Xbox 360 still has the larger population of Xbox Live members active on that platform still than those on the Xbox 1 platform. It's not just system specs in regards to consoles. It's also about the user and online service. And Microsoft does a
brilliant job. Xbox 360 and Xbox 1 actually can be considered social media like Facebook it. Party Chat, Voice and text messaging and picture messaging on Xbox 360 (I would like picture messaging on Xbox 1), video chat on console, and playing and meeting peps
using the platform from different countries. I think Sony copied or got ideas of Microsoft's Xbox 360 Xbox Live Party Chat idea on their 8th gen console has Party Chat. Being able to chat and video chat with people across the globe easily using Xbox Live.
You can do different things on your console while in Party Chat. Also on Xbox 360's UI, you can look at other people's 3D Xbox avatars on the dashboard. Xbox 1's UI shows Party Chat format a bit differently to Xbox 360, it doesn't show it how the 360 does
it by going to Social, Parties, no 3D avatars of who's in the Party. I just think this feature Microsoft included on Xbox 360 is really kwl!

 

Phil Spencer already said it won't happen. Why keep spamming these stupid click bait articles? It's pointless.