Xbox 720 document leak - $299 console with Kinect 2 for 2013

[Deleted_171835]

Xbox 720

• Support for Blu-ray
• Native 3D output and glasses
• Concurrent apps, and additional sensor and peripheral support.
• 6x performance increase,
• True 1080p output with full 3D support and an "always on" state for the console.

A slide on core hardware indicates that the next Xbox will be designed to be scalable in the number of CPU cores and their frequencies. Microsoft appears to have been debating whether to use six or eight ARM or x86 cores clocked at 2GHz each with 4GB of DDR4 memory alongside three PPC cores clocked at 3.2GHz each for backwards compatibility with existing Xbox 360 titles.

On a side note, that 4GB of RAM has now apparently been upgraded to 8GB. Yes, you read that right!

Microsoft positions its Xbox 720 as the only box needed for living room entertainment in the document, providing background recording functionality for TV content and a unified Windows 8 foundation to make it easier for application developers to build apps that target Xbox, PC, and Windows Phone. Microsoft rounds off the document with a promised price point of $299 with its Kinect 2 hardware and a prediction of a 10 year lifecycle with more than 100 million units sold.

Kinect 2

Incremental improvement over the current hardware.

• Higher accuracy
• Stereo imaging
• Improved voice recognition
• Support for four player tracking
• Improved RGB camera
• Dedicated hardware processing.

"In Kinect v2 we can continue to go beyond controllers and offer peripherals and accessories that heighten game immersion," The Kinect accessories idea appears to be one that is not designed to replace controllers, but will allow devices to interact with the sensor.

Kinect Glasses (project Fortaleza)

Roadmap for its "Fortaleza" Kinect Glasses — which appears to be a research project the company is working on. Glasses appear to be Wi-Fi- or 4G-enabled and incorporate augmented reality. Described as a "breakthrough heads up and hands-free device," Kinect Glasses is marked as a 2014 product that won't launch alongside the Xbox 720 console.

http://www.theverge....-doc-leak-rumor
http://www.scribd.co...ckpoint-Draft-1

Note that there may have been some changes to the roadmap after the document was released. Although most of what's mentioned here should be correct.

 

[AlanJohn]

Holy fucking shit Microsoft what are you doing?
Why are you calling it the 720? Are you walking in circles or something?

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Wow. That's kind of a big leap. AR, 6x more power. Shit.

 

[Deleted_171835]

Wow. That's kind of a big leap. AR, 6x more power. Shit.

It's not as big of a leap as people expected (10x). It's significant but smaller than PS2->PS3.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Wow. That's kind of a big leap. AR, 6x more power. Shit.

It's not as big of a leap as people expected (10x). It's significant but smaller than PS2->PS3.

Yeah that was sarcasm lol. I expected Microsoft to go all "WE'RE GONNA MAKE THIS THING AMAZINGLY AMAZING GRAPHICS GAMES CALL OF DUTY HALO!"

 

[Hells Malice]

Interesting.
Well hopefully they make a version without the PoS kinect so I don't have to pay for something i'll never use once ever.

The whole "it does everything!" is actually turning me off the console though. I want a device to play videogames, and I don't care if it does anything else...I already have devices in place set up to do everything it's going to want to try to do.

 

[Deleted_171835]

The whole "it does everything!" is actually turning me off the console though. I want a device to play videogames, and I don't care if it does anything else...I already have devices in place set up to do everything it's going to want to try to do.

That was Microsoft's goal from the very beginning with the Xbox. They didn't want to just make a videogame console. They wanted to own the living-room and have the Xbox be the main and only console there.

 

[Eerpow]

If the power rumors are true it's in about the same league as the Wii U which is said to be around 4x the 360 when it comes to raw calculations, I'm expecting next gen to be very similar to the PS2/GC/Xbox era.
Wii U being the weakest but not out of the question for multiplats.

WiiU = PS2
Xbox720 = GC
PS4 = Xbox

I'm very interested to see what Sony does next, seeing how Nintendo pushes the second screen and Microsoft continues to develop the Kinect they must have something up their sleeve in order to stand out.
Move 2.0?

 

[Hells Malice]

The whole "it does everything!" is actually turning me off the console though. I want a device to play videogames, and I don't care if it does anything else...I already have devices in place set up to do everything it's going to want to try to do.

That was Microsoft's goal from the very beginning with the Xbox. They didn't want to just make a videogame console. They wanted to own the living-room and have the Xbox be the main and only console there.

Well until it can play WiiU/wii/gamecube/PS1-2-3-4 games, ain't gonna happen.

 

[Gahars]

Putting this right into the IFT file.

The ball's in your court now, Microsoft.

 

[Deleted_171835]

Putting this right into the IFT file.

The ball's in your court now, Microsoft.

It is true as a matter of fact. It was asked to be taken down.


Some details may have changed since this is a doc from 2010 but it should be mostly relevant.

 

[DinohScene]

I felt my pants move a bit~

The technology pretty much is there.
However since this is MS.....

I'm a bit skeptical yet psyched at the same time

 

[KingVamp]

This is seriously real? All for $299?

Well, anyway, I can't wait to see how Sony console turns out if this is true.

 

[WiiUBricker]

In 20 years M$ won't sell video game consoles anymore, but whole M$ branded living rooms with a built-in Xbox 2880, Kinect 5 sensors all over the place, M$ furniture and one 100 inch 3D TV set. All for $299 of course.

 

[Nathan Drake]

I'm going to list myself as skeptical. Being asked to take something down doesn't automatically verify it as true. You may add suspicion, but jumping the gun and screaming "THEN IT MUST BE TRUE" is a little ridiculous. And yes, I saw who requested it to be taken down. Still proves absolutely nothing. You still have to want it to be true.

Grain of salt, guys. Maybe an entire shaker.

Plus, $299? It sounds like they're going the bleeding edge technology route. This thing is probably going to cost around $500.
This just feels like something slapped together by a hopeful, being preached as truth. More elaborate lies have been told.

 

[Deleted_171835]

I'm going to list myself as skeptical. Being asked to take something down doesn't automatically verify it as true. You may add suspicion, but jumping the gun and screaming "THEN IT MUST BE TRUE" is a little ridiculous. And yes, I saw who requested it to be taken down. Still proves absolutely nothing. You still have to want it to be true.

Grain of salt, guys. Maybe an entire shaker.

Plus, $299? It sounds like they're going the bleeding edge technology route. This thing is probably going to cost around $500.
This just feels like something slapped together by a hopeful, being preached as truth. More elaborate lies have been told.

1. This document is awfully long to be fake. It would have had to be one dedicated guy.
2. It was taken down by a law firm, not just any random guy.
3. It resembles other Microsoft power-points in design.
4. Username in some parts of the doc was "nkachroo/Documents/...". Nkachroo = Naveen Kachroo who is the director of product planning at Microsoft.

And $299 could always be changed, might just be a placeholder price. Nothing really screams bleeding-edge anyways.

The document is real.

 

[Nathan Drake]

I'm going to list myself as skeptical. Being asked to take something down doesn't automatically verify it as true. You may add suspicion, but jumping the gun and screaming "THEN IT MUST BE TRUE" is a little ridiculous. And yes, I saw who requested it to be taken down. Still proves absolutely nothing. You still have to want it to be true.

Grain of salt, guys. Maybe an entire shaker.

Plus, $299? It sounds like they're going the bleeding edge technology route. This thing is probably going to cost around $500.
This just feels like something slapped together by a hopeful, being preached as truth. More elaborate lies have been told.

1. This document is awfully long to be fake. It would have had to be one dedicated guy.
2. It was taken down by a law firm, not just any random guy.
3. It resembles other Microsoft power-points in design.
4. Username in some parts of the doc was "nkachroo/Documents/...". Nkachroo = Naveen Kachroo who is the director of product planning at Microsoft.

And $299 could always be changed, might just be a placeholder price. Nothing really screams bleeding-edge anyways.

The document is real.

1. There are many people out there who have nothing better to do. You argue it was long, I argue that there are a number of dedicated trolls.
2. Like I said, I know who took it down. There can be many, many reasons for a law firm taking it down. Saying "HERPA DERPA IT'S REAL THEN," isn't nearly enough for me.
3. Oh, and absolutely nobody could put something like that together themselves?
4. That can be faked, easily.

You can argue suspicious, but you can't argue that it's beyond a shadow of a doubt real. You absolutely can not.

 

[Deleted_171835]

1. There are many people out there who have nothing better to do. You argue it was long, I argue that there are a number of dedicated trolls.
2. Like I said, I know who took it down. There can be many, many reasons for a law firm taking it down. Saying "HERPA DERPA IT'S REAL THEN," isn't nearly enough for me.
3. Oh, and absolutely nobody could put something like that together themselves?
4. That can be faked, easily.

You can argue suspicious, but you can't argue that it's beyond a shadow of a doubt real. You absolutely can not.

Please do tell me what other reason a law firm would have to take down a document that's not real? Especially a firm under contract with Microsoft?

Yes, some of the other things can be faked but it would take a lot of effort. The fact that most of the info here are in line with things that we already know and that there are many internal company references add to the point that it's probably real.

This is the path for some of the images in the document?

\nkachroo/Documents/Work/Project 10/Finished Frames for Monday/Finished Frames for Monday/Frame 07.jpg

Are you telling me that a troll changed his username to a relatively unknown Microsoft product director just for the sake of making a fake? That's pretty unlikely.

I say the fact that a law firm took it down means that it's real. The other things can be faked but you can't exactly convince a firm to take down a document.

 

[Nathan Drake]

1. There are many people out there who have nothing better to do. You argue it was long, I argue that there are a number of dedicated trolls.
2. Like I said, I know who took it down. There can be many, many reasons for a law firm taking it down. Saying "HERPA DERPA IT'S REAL THEN," isn't nearly enough for me.
3. Oh, and absolutely nobody could put something like that together themselves?
4. That can be faked, easily.

You can argue suspicious, but you can't argue that it's beyond a shadow of a doubt real. You absolutely can not.

Please do tell me what other reason a law firm would have to take down a document that's not real? Especially a firm under contract with Microsoft?

Yes, some of the other things can be faked but it would take a lot of effort. The fact that most of the info here are in line with things that we already know and that there are many internal company references add to the point that it's probably real.

This is the path for some of the images in the document?

nkachroo/Documents/Work/Project 10/Finished Frames for Monday/Finished Frames for Monday/Frame 07.jpg

Are you telling me that a troll changed his username to a relatively unknown Microsoft product director just for the sake of making a fake? That's pretty unlikely.

I say the fact that a law firm took it down means that it's real. The other things can be faked but you can't exactly convince a firm to take down a document.

How about an inaccurate representation of future plans that may prove detrimental to future sales? How about they don't want people thinking that it's real when it isn't, and simply asking a site to take it down yourself wouldn't work? I doubt Microsoft even gave the law firm much of a reason. Just "we don't want this online, make them take it down." You act like the law firm would need the documents to be real to justify their removal. The document might be real, and sure, that's one potential reason. It isn't the only reason, though. You've simply convinced yourself that it is. Of course, you could just be spouting the opinion of the last couple of pages of the Neogaf thread.

Like you said, it's stuff that we know, and how would we know they were internal company references, if they were, you know, internal company references? That's either more assumptions, or those references aren't as private as you may be trying to get across.

That would be easy to fake. Them knowing a name means nothing. I know lots of names. They could have heard it any place at any time. All because you might not be able to easily dredge up the name with six seconds of Googling doesn't mean that it isn't out there to be found.

By the way, welcome to justice in these fine United States.

 

[Rasas]

Well I'm hoping it is has the $299 price since I'm not looking to buy a 500+ console with so many flaws in the design. I know the above information can easily be fake and your not denying it isn't possibly true so lets just leave it at that. That it is possible true or false I mean.