Microsoft’s Cheaper, Disc-Less Next-Gen Xbox Is Reportedly Still Happening

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
11,627
Points
83
Project Scarlett isn't the only next-gen console that is up Microsoft's sleeve. Despite earlier rumors claiming it was canceled, Kotaku's sources are confident that a lower-cost, disc-less version of Scarlett remains in development. The cheaper console, code-named Lockhart, will succeed the Xbox One S and target 1440p/60 FPS.

What we don’t know—and what likely isn’t finalized yet—is how the pricing will shake out. But it’s easiest to think of Anaconda as a successor to the Xbox One X and Lockhart as a successor to the Xbox One S, with a similar performance disparity. Game developers will be expected to support both Anaconda and Lockhart, which some are worried might hamper their ambitions for next-gen games in the coming years.
 
You don't have to use discs in the disc version, you just have the option. The only reason to buy the "S" model is if you can't afford the "X" model or truly don't care about graphics/performance above the playable base so the extra cost isn't worth it to you.
 
I'd be fine without a disc drive, however, I'm not liking the idea of losing performance by choosing the disc-less version. Wish they would just keep the specs the same but remove the optical drive.

But yeah, I'm also on board for a optical drive-free future.
 
You don't have to use discs in the disc version, you just have the option. The only reason to buy the "S" model is if you can't afford the "X" model or truly don't care about graphics/performance above the playable base so the extra cost isn't worth it to you.
..but ..but .. I don't need that option .. I have an S right now that I got for free from a buddy because the disc drive doesn't work .. It pays to be a professional mooch ... sometimes .. 2k @60fps on my 1080p TV would be fine too :D
 
Models without optical drives are cool I guess, but I much prefer installing games from a blu-ray than over the Internet connection. Plus physical copies can be loaned out to others. I spent most of my life borrowing video games (and systems) from friends. Been getting harder and harder to do as more and more people go digital-only. Not such a problem on platforms like PC where games can often be had for super-cheap. Don't need to borrow a game when it's on sale for 5 ****ing dollars 2 years after it came out. If the console models without disc drives are cheaper though, than by all means go for it.

With XB1 you got the high-end X, and then the normal S that replaced the base XB1, with the S coming in two versions, one with optical drive and one without. Now though it sounds like for the next Xbox the high-end unit will have the drive, but the lower-end model won't. Well what if someone wants the lower-end model with a drive? You have a choice with XB1 S, but with this next Xbox that doesn't look to be the case. What if you want the high-end model without the drive? I bet there are some people out there who would have liked an XB1 X without a disc drive for a cheaper price. Microsoft should do that for the next Xbox.

Still, kinda crazy to think about consoles not using any kind of physical media at all. No cartridges or optical discs of any kind. OSes like Win10 come on flash drives when you buy them, why not games? What if you didn't even need to install the game, it just ran off the flash drive? Although you could have the choice of dumping the contents onto internal storage. Aahh, but they'd probably want you to keep the flash drive connected to the console for DRM reasons. Just like when you install a console game from an optical disc onto the internal drive, you still need to keep the disc in the optical drive so they know you own a legal copy of the game. Never liked having to do that. That's why on PC back in the day, so many gamers rolled with No-CD/No-DVD cracks even if they owned the game. Was very handy for LANParties too.
 
The disc's are **** near pointless as it is. You buy a game, insert the disc, wait an 30-40 minutes for it to install, then have to download a 20-60 GB update anyways. With the size of these game updates approaching the size of the initial game install I'd rather just download the entire game.
 
The disc's are **** near pointless as it is. You buy a game, insert the disc, wait an 30-40 minutes for it to install, then have to download a 20-60 GB update anyways. With the size of these game updates approaching the size of the initial game install I'd rather just download the entire game.
This. I have crappy ISP, and would love - LOVE - to purchase physical media and skip the days it takes me to download titles.

Except the Day 0 patches are usually almost as big as the game in the first place, and you have to get up and change discs to play a different game (I am that lazy, tyvm).

So there is very little advantage to physical media any more, and more inconvenience than anything.

To the folks that claim they want to “own” their software, don’t fool yourself - you still don’t own it if you have physical media, and it can just as easily get shut down as if you had purchased it digitally.
 
Just like when you install a console game from an optical disc onto the internal drive, you still need to keep the disc in the optical drive so they know you own a legal copy of the game. Never liked having to do that. That's why on PC back in the day, so many gamers rolled with No-CD/No-DVD cracks even if they owned the game. Was very handy for LANParties too.

I was a frequent flyer of ye ol' megagames.com back in the day for the game cracks. I never was a fan of having to have the physical media inserted to play a game
 
Become a Patron!
Back
Top