No HDD in Core 360 a 'mistake', says dev Options

[88 Ecko Unltd 88]

should of had the hd already with it in the first place.. we all already know this

[syntaxerror329]

At least we have a cheaper version to replace our RROD units when microsoft refuses the warrenty.

[mlmadmax]

This has been beat to death already. I believe it was stated by a dev on this forum that if a game detects that 360 has a hard drive it uses it, if there is no hard drive it won't cach and my increase load times. The good thing about the core is it gave people who won't play online the chance to save a few bucks.

If you want the benefits of a harddrive get one if you want to save some money and don't care about the performance boost than you have the choice to save a few bucks.

Choice is always a good thing.

[soopahfly]

You could argue that MS is learning, This is only their 2nd console.

[Allen626]

The problem is that games can't use having a HDD as a bottom line. And they can't have gamers have choppy games if they don't have the HDD. So they can't program games as if everyone had it. This is bad whenever they need to load info faster then the DVD drive can provide it or they can cache into RAM. Like a pilot game that needs to load terrain fast because you are flying over a lot at a high speed.

This has been said a million times BEFORE THE 360 ever got released!!! Can't say we didn't tell you so. BECAUSE EVERYONE DID!

[ChrisF]

Learnings from Xbox 1:
A) MSFT couldn't charge a premium retail price just because their console included a harddrive
B ) fixed costs of harddrive construction make it very hard to scale the price down regardless of storage size on the actual drive
C) A + B = margin compression and significant losses on hardware
D) C = Harddrive to be made optional in Xbox360 so that they can better decrease costs and make money on the damn thing (and not have to drop it fast when the next Xbox comes out which they've been endlessly criticized for and will be interesting to see how Sony handles)

Pretty simple stuff. No mystery or hidden agenda. They've gone on record with all of it. I think they've formally allowed devs to use the HD and make games as HD exclusive. This is just how it shakes out for them. They got stuck last time and specifically designed so as not to get stuck again. That said, who knew the PS3 was going to come in at $599 originally and that even after several years MSFT would have only dropped the price $50. This gen likely turned out different than they thought but you can't go around not adjusting your game plan in the hope that something you can't control will be different and you won't take a beating.

This post has been edited by ChrisF: Mar 4 2008, 12:24 PM

[steveju]

I believe you are correct, but i also think that one game actually required a HDD, but i'm not sure how they got around that.

If I remember correctly, you can't play Splinter Cell Double Agent without a storage device (HDD/Memory Card).

[HotKnife420]

I believe you are correct, but i also think that one game actually required a HDD, but i'm not sure how they got around that.

Now, I don't fully understand why 360's didn't require the HDD, but at the same time I am glad the 360's HDD is upgradeable (at a price that makes me scream, but that's besides the point.) I do believe that it's all about choice too, even though most everyone chooses to have an HDD. Now, as a media center user using the 360 as an extender, i did buy a core without a HDD, and use a mem card to put my profile on so i know who is online and what not, and to cache the media center app, but i don't do any gaming on it. I would have bought the HDD version if i didn't have a choice, but i felt that this 360 wasn't going to be a gaming system, so why not buy the cheaper one.

That would probably be Final Fantasy XI, and for the only reason being that it was a port of a game that required a hard drive.

As for MS deciding not to make the hdd necessary this time around, my guess is they were worried about it playing an integral role in a hack, much like the softmodded xbox1. Of course, that theory itself lacks logic, so maybe I'm giving them too little credit. Perhaps they noticed the success of all the systems that did *better* than the Xbox 1 that had hdds inside, and took a cue from that.

[bucko]

Beh the 20GB HDD was a mistake to, now they can't justify the price of a 120GB (£130) because the 20GB was expensive in the first place.

[DeMoN_DARREN]

"I forgot to take the washing out of the machine" - MISTAKE

"I didn't do my homework" - MISTAKE

"We didn't feel a HDD was a requirement for next gen" - PLAIN RETARDED

[Eluder]

I don't understand why the developers don't just do a check in the system, if an HDD exists, then cache some files on to it, if it doesn't, well then don't. Is the MS kernel that restrictive that this sort of simple check can't be done?

[sirsmacketh]

LOL.... I own about 10 360 games. I have 2 360s. One has a hdd and one doesn't. Every single one of those games works on both 360s. I carry my profile on a mem card.

My brother in law has an 80GB PS3. His hard drive died - guess what, the PS3 wouldn't boot. He had to send it in for repairs.

Now the 360 HDD is an "add-on" - the 360 will boot and you can play games with or without it - good decision.

However, I can see from a dev's standpoint that trying to get a game to run without a hdd when caching becomes an issue and the only place to go right now is the hdd. I don't think it's possible with a mem card.

With the complexity of future titles, the 360 hdd is going to become a must-have. Microsoft should lower the price if they want their hdd-less gaming community to upgrade.

There's always "used" hdds for $50 at ebgames.

This post has been edited by sirsmacketh: Mar 4 2008, 11:42 PM

[cooljazz]

I don't understand why the developers don't just do a check in the system, if an HDD exists, then cache some files on to it, if it doesn't, well then don't. Is the MS kernel that restrictive that this sort of simple check can't be done?

It probably is being done. However, that's extra overhead on the developers if they want to have both of those code paths in their game. There is extra development and testing work that needs to be done. It all could have been avoided if a HD was mandatory. Then, they could just write one code path.

[davinator456]

Who would of guessed that having a computer without a hard drive was a mistake?

[JAG_128]

THE 360 was ment tobe more than just a games consol , therefor it should of had a HD and not just a 20 gb one , but one that you can easly exchange for a 500 gb one if req. IE: storage of games / films / music , for me this was a major fault how can it become a media centre as it was intended , if you cant do these simple things with it