Microsofts next console will require an Internet connection in order to function, ruling out a second-hand game market for the platform. A new iteration of Xbox Live will be an integral part of Microsofts next console, while improved Kinect hardware will also ship alongside the unit.
Sources with first-hand experience of Microsofts next generation console have told us that although the next Xbox will be absolutely committed to online functionality, games will still be made available to purchase in physical form. Next Xbox games will be manufactured on 50GB-capacity Blu-ray discs, Microsoft having conceded defeat to Sony following its ill-fated backing of the HD-DVD format. It is believed that games purchased on disc will ship with activation codes, and will have no value beyond the initial user.
Our source has also confirmed that the next Xboxs recently rumoured specs are entirely accurate. That means an AMD eight-core x64 1.6GHz CPU, a D3D11.x 800MHz graphics solution and 8GB of DDR3 RAM. As of now, the consoles hard drive capacity is said to be undecided, but Microsofts extended commitment to online delivery suggests that it will be the largest unit it has put inside a console to date.
i don't like kinect, and this doesn't sound too good to me
I believe it to be true. Compulsory Kinect and online activation = no purchase for me. I only purchase games with online activation now because I can bypass it with a crack (and burn said crack to a disk and keep it in the box with the game).
It mostly demonstrates Microsoft's complete ignorance of the state of the Internet outside of the US. (Not that we didn't know that anyway with their pitiful Live offerings.)
There is some good things about having a compulsory kenect.
First off its cheap hardware costs wise, probably costs Microsoft $40 or less for each one.
Second, developers can assume you now a kenetic with a built in microphone and camera. I'd expect more stuff take a picture/scan of your face and get it in game. But there could be other cool uses for it as well. Maybe a built in skype like program that works between multiple games so you can get a big hangout going, with video. Also skyrim style FOS-RO-DA shouts and other mic based features.
"Sonys new console will feature graphics chips developed by Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) and processors capable of rendering games at 240 frames a second, Pachter said. Current-generation games typically render at 30 or 60 frames per second. "
Nice! So 240 fps for nextgen then? In Pacther we trust.
The hypothetical string will also be 10 times as long!
On a serious note though, frames can be rendered as quick as they can be written on the framebuffer as it always has been.
Gamedevelopers will also find reasons for rendering as much as they can as close as they can get to 30 fps, this is a constant in the push for fidelity, no matter how much hardware we push towards those FRAMES!!
First off its cheap hardware costs wise, probably costs Microsoft $40 or less for each one.
I seriously doubt that. It's not like Kinect wasn't manufactured en-mass and sold at a loss, and it still cost a fortune. Kinect's successor will not be different.
Second, developers can assume you now a kenetic with a built in microphone and camera. I'd expect more stuff take a picture/scan of your face and get it in game. But there could be other cool uses for it as well. Maybe a built in skype like program that works between multiple games so you can get a big hangout going, with video. Also skyrim style FOS-RO-DA shouts and other mic based features.
This is all gimmicky crap that does nothing to benefit the majority of game titles, these aren't really benefits.
It's nice to have a microphone, but there's a reason we use headsets (it's so the microphone isn't on the other side of the room from the speaker, and the speaker doesn't have to raise their voice - and without that distance interference is much more minimal).
People seem to forget that the first online 360 games did have webcam support and that it was pulled for more than a few good reasons. The hangout idea isn't great either, because it'd be reliant on a huge amount of bandwidth for all that video that you really want to be used for your game.
Voice is disabled for anyone who doesn't have an English language console in current Kinect titles. Given that Microsoft has repeatedly proven totally US centric, this won't change and developers won't bother to use that feature. To top it off, voice based control systems are never really going to work because players don't want to sit around yelling at their TV. Even if they did, a normal headset microphone is once again a cheaper and superior option.
To top it off, anyone outside the USA who isn't super-wealthy usually struggles to find space to actually play kinect games anyway. I have a large living space and it still isn't enough... and then the lighting conditions or something aren't ideal either and it doesn't work properly regardless. I doubt this is also going to change.
Finally, I haven't encountered a single Kinect game worth paying for yet. My library contains all first party Kinect titles to date (except that Nike fitness one), and they're far from great. I did enjoy the Gunstringer, but it's not £50 retail fare. Fable: The Journey is quite good, but it is also painfully flawed.
Cmon folks, you don't really think that with the vast amount of PS3's and Xbox360s in the world that aren't connected to the internet that either company would make their next systems require an online connection?
Cmon folks, you don't really think that with the vast amount of PS3's and Xbox360s in the world that aren't connected to the internet that either company would make their next systems require an online connection?
You never know, companies do some crazy things.
Plus, historically whenever a company starts to feel like they're running the show / leading the charge they get stupid. It happened to Nintendo (see N64/cartridges), it happened to Sony(see PS3/$599), its bound to happen to MS.
Cmon folks, you don't really think that with the vast amount of PS3's and Xbox360s in the world that aren't connected to the internet that either company would make their next systems require an online connection?
I worked for Microsoft for long enough to know that this is exactly the kind of thing that they will do.
I agree that it's yet another nail in the coffin for the next generation of home consoles, but see it like this and you can understand the motivation: they lost money like crazy on hardware this gen, and probably just about broke even on the back of not exactly insignificant online play charges. If you force players to be online at any time to play their games, they're possibly more likely to be tempted into multiplayer, and can be pitched DLC. As neither the Wii U, Vita or 3DS set the world on fire, it's possibly a good faith move towards the likes of GameStop, too.
it's possibly a good faith move towards the likes of GameStop, too.
It's the exact opposite. Curbing used game sales dramatically reduces game retailer potential earnings. The margins on new games as a retailer are really small. Either retailers will suffer and close, or retailers will pass on the costs to the customer. The only winner is Microsoft / Sony.
I don't think Sony would follow MS on this one, they've got way too much to prove with this coming generation to take such a risk.
That's the thing, the minute one system comes out first and says that, all the other one has to do is say "hey, we're not doing that, c'mon check us out." I doubt either side would allow their competitor that advantage.
I seriously doubt that. It's not like Kinect wasn't manufactured en-mass and sold at a loss, and it still cost a fortune. Kinect's successor will not be different.
Nov 13th 2010
"Based on a recent teardown conducted by UBM TechInsights, it looks like the most expensive part of Microsoft's Kinect is the box it comes in. According to UBM TechInsights, the Kinect contains about $56 worth of hardware. Around $17 of that cost is attributed to the PrimeSense motion detection system, including the microphones, cameras and processor.
Of course, the $56 figure doesn't include manufacturing costs (not to mention some undoubtedly massive marketing costs). It's also worth noting that UBM's assessment is just an estimate and only Microsoft knows the real cost. Still, assuming the figure is even close to accurate, it would seem Microsoft makes an impressive chunk of change from the $150 price."
It's nice to have a microphone, but there's a reason we use headsets (it's so the microphone isn't on the other side of the room from the speaker, and the speaker doesn't have to raise their voice - and without that distance interference is much more minimal).
People seem to forget that the first online 360 games did have webcam support and that it was pulled for more than a few good reasons. The hangout idea isn't great either, because it'd be reliant on a huge amount of bandwidth for all that video that you really want to be used for your game.
I think all your points are valid, I just wanted to address these 2. To a developer, there's a big difference most people having a piece of hardware, and everyone having it. You obviously do not want to alienate your audience by spending time on a feature not everyone can use. I've always hated squad controls in video games like Mass Effect. I only used it when I kept on dying in certain spots. I think it'd be great to be able to tell your ai to fall back or push or tell them to throw a grenade. A lot of people don't want to have to wear a headset for a single player game. And the hardware cost for a mic is really minimal. Of course voice controls tend to be buggy, but having a mic gives features like this a better chance of being explored and developed.
The webcam for the xbox failed because it was kinda expensive, and there wasn't many games that used it. Maybe 3 arcade games and one (Tony Hawk?) that allowed you to use your face in game. I just think it'd be sweet if game with character creation allow you to use the 3d scanning feature of the kenetic to automatically tweak the "sliders" to match your face. Again I just feel like these things are way more likely to be explored by dev's if everyone has one. Of course it's completely ignorable as well, and I dont' think many games should rely on it.
It mostly demonstrates Microsoft's complete ignorance of the state of the Internet outside of the US. (Not that we didn't know that anyway with their pitiful Live offerings.)
The US ranks fairly low in speed, penetration and price, so I'm confused. Net Index
I wonder if this has anything to do with the console ban being lifted in China.
"Based on a recent teardown conducted by UBM TechInsights, it looks like the most expensive part of Microsoft's Kinect is the box it comes in. According to UBM TechInsights, the Kinect contains about $56 worth of hardware. Around $17 of that cost is attributed to the PrimeSense motion detection system, including the microphones, cameras and processor.
They seem to have forgotten that it also came with a bundled with a game. I also believe a large part of the cost of Kinect is an attempt at absorbing the cost of developing the software to go with it. The successor will be cheaper for sure, but that's still a ~$50 addition to the hardware a lot of people don't even want, let alone pay for.
To a developer, there's a big difference most people having a piece of hardware, and everyone having it. You obviously do not want to alienate your audience by spending time on a feature not everyone can use.
This is true, but as a developer you also don't want to waste time (ergo, lots of money) developing niche features that only supplement the game in a minor way. A lot of the time the only things that make use of these features are first party tech demos for a reason.
Of course voice controls tend to be buggy, but having a mic gives features like this a better chance of being explored and developed.
It's worse than that - not only are they unreliable, they're also a far slower form of input. In your Mass Effect example, the time it would take to say a simple command like "Kaiden, Grenade, Banshee" in a clear and processable manner is pretty horrific - it's something like 4-5 seconds not including the time it takes for the character to perform the action. In Mass Effect you have to determine which character is performing the action, what action to perform, and what target to go for - this is all more easily performed with normal control schemes (on the PC it was pretty easy since it all used the mouse). You also have to have a minimum of two syllables in each word for them to be interpetable, can't have any two words that are pronounced vaguely similarly, and likely will need to pause between statements. It's nasty if the control is going to require anything other than one word. If it doesn't work for whatever reason and you have to repeat yourself, you're probably dead anyway.
There's an RTS game on the 360 that has an option for pure voice control whose name I forget. Even when the voice commands worked fluidly (and they often didn't), players quickly realised that using the voice control scheme was simply too slow to react to the game and reverted to using the pad anyway.
I just think it'd be sweet if game with character creation allow you to use the 3d scanning feature of the kenetic to automatically tweak the "sliders" to match your face. Again I just feel like these things are way more likely to be explored by dev's if everyone has one. Of course it's completely ignorable as well, and I dont' think many games should rely on it.
Kinect's level of fidelity is pretty low and the successor probably won't be much better, you'd probably end up with some hideous amalgamation much akin to what you get out of Face Invaders on the 3DS (whose camera setup is not all that disimilar). Moreover, it'll go the dodo the same way as the 360 camera because it's only a matter of time before people start scanning their genitals, dogs arse, or whatever other inappropriateness they can come up with that circumvents whatever control algorithms are used to try and stop that sort of thing.
The US ranks fairly low in speed, penetration and price, so I'm confused. Net Index
It ranks better than almost all other countries where Live is available. The UK is apparently ranked better than the US, but I suspect that's a quirk of the data thanks to London. Internet availabilty outside of a few major cities isn't great, and in large parts of the country isn't any better than it was ten years ago.
Live isn't available in half of Europe (still), or the Middle East despite promises to the contrary made a couple of years ago. Unless they improve their availability, requiring online activations will cut out a huge quantity of people - but they won't care because half their business or more is the USA anyway.
There's an RTS game on the 360 that has an option for pure voice control whose name I forget. Even when the voice commands worked fluidly (and they often didn't), players quickly realised that using the voice control scheme was simply too slow to react to the game and reverted to using the pad anyway.
Were you thinking of End War? Even if you weren't, you described the voice control system perfectly.
I agree that we're a long ways from having reliable, and more importantly, quick input other than physical input.
I don't think Sony would follow MS on this one, they've got way too much to prove with this coming generation to take such a risk.
What do you mean? The PS3 has done quite well; sure the XBox is slightly more popular but it's not because of lack of quality from SONY's side... the 360 has always been about the multiplayer whereas the PS3 has been more of a single player experience console, that's all.
Around $400 does sound about right, I can't see there being $600 versions of the NeXbox or PS4 this time around.
I agree with all of their guesses in that video clip about the up comming conference.
1. No price or date
2. Nothing playable
3. Short, under 1 hour presentation
4. Games will be shown
5. Dualshock like controller.
What do you mean? The PS3 has done quite well; sure the XBox is slightly more popular but it's not because of lack of quality from SONY's side... the 360 has always been about the multiplayer whereas the PS3 has been more of a single player experience console, that's all.
They're doing fine now, but this generation has seen them go from basically the industry leader to 3rd place. The situation with Vita atm isn't doing wonders for their reputation either.
Yeah I dunno what their story with their handhelds is... they repeated the mistake of not putting out enough good games. Mindboggling. I'm shocked when I go through 'Best PSP titles'. There's very little there that would interest me.
Wouldn't be surprised. We got the Ps3 (60GB console, one controller) for $850 when it launched here (the one bundled with a game was closing on $1000). When the 40GB console launched (console, one controller) it was $600.
Wouldn't be surprised. We got the Ps3 (60GB console, one controller) for $850 when it launched here (the one bundled with a game was closing on $1000). When the 40GB console launched (console, one controller) it was $600.
Almost double the US prices, and six months later
The European market is always getting fucked by nearly all vendors... So it shouldn't come as a surprise if the PS4 is crazy expensive.
hmm according to a Japanese newspaper (Asahi Shimbun) the ps4 is going to cost about 40.000yen which is about 400 dollar. Now i'm really curious what it's really going to be. Let's hope for this price though. They also mention could technology from gaikai but who knows. We'll know it the 20th i hope.
Well, isn't that the point of a console thread? We are discussing what we think they should do, and what they are not doing. It would be nice if the people behind the consoles payed a little more attention not only to the market, but to the people playing with them.
Steambox seems to be doing that... less restrictive and it can change the game for the console market. Seems relevant to me. But hey... this would not be the first time i am wrong in the interwebs.
The actual ps3 is here around 499€, slim version + game and 500gb HDD. I suppose the 400€ version will be for the "lite" version, and that's quite expensive being more of the same, and more with such tech specs nowadays.
The steam box is pretty relevant, Glottis8 has reason, and i say there's no doubt it will be another option for the end consumer.
BTW, xbox 720 and ps4 will have a stronger and draconian DRM, games will be "soul binded" to an account and to a hardware, and you will need internet in order to link your games to you account and hardware. It will be like to have a PC with Steam . So if you read "steam box" here, don't be surprised because Valve will change ALL.
i personally dont care about the linking of games to my account, i always buy my games new anyways and would rather be giving my money to game devs/publishers than those greedy gamestop swines. with companies like that pushing pre-owed so hard and not giving devs a slice, no wonder so many studios shut down if their game isnt a huge success.
The people who got stiffed the most were Iceland and Turkey, whose launch Ps3's were over $1200 - literally three times the price of the US. It's pretty horrific.
I for one hope to god they dont call it Orbis. Sorry to say but this old Japanese mindset that Sony of course has being Japanese based is hurting them. Nobody knows about the Vita, no one knows it means Life nor do they care. No one will know wtf an Orbis is, they wont see it as the next Playstation and no one will care it means Circle.
Hope they go with PS4 or just Playstation. Really hope they dont do something stupid like getting rid of the Playstation brand name, but honestly, Sony constantly makes stupid decisions like that so I wont hold my breath.
Do you think for the general, dumb consumer.. the name "Playstation 4" can be kind of boring? I like it, but I am wondering if it will not be flashy enough for the general public. I say we call it the Super Playstation.
Really hope they dont do something stupid like getting rid of the Playstation brand name, but honestly, Sony constantly makes stupid decisions like that so I wont hold my breath.
What are you referring to here? I mean, we've got the Playstation, Playstation 2, Playstation 3, Playstation Portable...yeah the Vita is a little weird, but how do they have a history of naming things idiotically? Do they tend to do weird stuff outside of their game consoles I don't know about?
Though, even if they did name it the Orbis, nothing will ever be as dumb as going from "Revolution" to "Wii".
nothing will ever be as dumb as going from "Revolution" to "Wii".
The only problem with the name 'Nintendo Revolution' is that its so good they'd have had a hard time following it up with future consoles Using the name Wii is like like starting at ground zero of bad names, they can only go up from there (at least I assumed that until they named their new system the WiiU)
The actual ps3 is here around 499, slim version + game and 500gb HDD. I suppose the 400 version will be for the "lite" version, and that's quite expensive being more of the same, and more with such tech specs nowadays.
The steam box is pretty relevant, Glottis8 has reason, and i say there's no doubt it will be another option for the end consumer.
BTW, xbox 720 and ps4 will have a stronger and draconian DRM, games will be "soul binded" to an account and to a hardware, and you will need internet in order to link your games to you account and hardware. It will be like to have a PC with Steam . So if you read "steam box" here, don't be surprised because Valve will change ALL.
1. Specs that are doubled or even quadrupled do not qualify as 'more of the same'.
2. The PS3 is in no way 500 euro in Europe. What you described sells for 350 in stores these days. There's been talk of a decent Steambox costing 1000 dollars; or around 800 euro.
3. While the fact that Valve is releasing a console is interesting, you could argue against it being relevant. I already have a steambox; it's called my PC. It's even hooked up to my telly.
4. Steam INVENTED what you are now criticizing here; DRM that binds a purchase to an account. Why is it OK when Steam does it on a PC but not when a console manufacturer does it?
4. Steam INVENTED what you are now criticizing here; DRM that binds a purchase to an account. Why is it OK when Steam does it on a PC but not when a console manufacturer does it?
I don't have any issue with digital distribution of console games or the DRM that comes with it. However, steam has been particularly good at making sure I have access to my purchases. When digital distribution was new I bought a few games on fileplanet's service which I can no longer install or play. Similarly, I bought music on itunes and after losing a hard drive was no longer able to get access to it. I have very little faith that most companies wont change their policys or later try to find new ways to minimize the value of what I have bought.
I don't have any issue with digital distribution of console games or the DRM that comes with it. However, steam has been particularly good at making sure I have access to my purchases. When digital distribution was new I bought a few games on fileplanet's service which I can no longer install or play. Similarly, I bought music on itunes and after losing a hard drive was no longer able to get access to it. I have very little faith that most companies wont change their policys or later try to find new ways to minimize the value of what I have bought.
Games bought online on the PS3 or Xbox haven't disappeared on people so I see no reason why it would start with the next consoles.
The main difference is you can play a pc game on any pc, these consoles are not going to be backwards compatible, most people do not keep old consoles, or they break. Also I don't see either company supporting the service years after they retire this round of consoles. I could easily see steam being around 15 years from now.
Yeah, this is going to be an issue I think. They REALLY need to offer free PS4 ports for games like Journey. Some people might be OK with paying the dollar it takes to transfer from PSP to Vita, and we may see that model, but for really recent games I feel it would be a dick move to charge for that. It does take dev time, but so does a huge amount of free expansions you see studios producing. Project Red being a good example.
1. Specs that are doubled or even quadrupled do not qualify as 'more of the same'.
2. The PS3 is in no way 500 euro in Europe. What you described sells for 350 in stores these days. There's been talk of a decent Steambox costing 1000 dollars; or around 800 euro.
3. While the fact that Valve is releasing a console is interesting, you could argue against it being relevant. I already have a steambox; it's called my PC. It's even hooked up to my telly.
4. Steam INVENTED what you are now criticizing here; DRM that binds a purchase to an account. Why is it OK when Steam does it on a PC but not when a console manufacturer does it?
1. Doubled or not, for a PC user and for all users, games will stay in the same generation, because the horsepower is like to have one of the cheapest videocards on the market, and with that, you CAN'T move the best PC games with ultra settings on PC (ported with pc features only or not ported). Which is the point you don't understand? and you were the one who wanted me to think you are a PC gamer? hehe
2. Like i said, the ps3 is sold here "AROUND" 499 (there are several versions), prices varies a lot, and of course, you can find a ~350 version without a game. A slim version with 12gb only, costs more than 200 euro HERE. I don't know why you are arguing me that, it's pointless, "arguing all" is your sport? :thumbdown:
3. I have several PCs, and all have more horsepower than a "better" steam box. Did you read the article? cuz the steam box will bring us a "PC Console". There will be a "good", "better", and "best" version. Read the article, it's a good read...
4. It seems like you don't know how to read, you imagine things, or simplily you like to put words i didn't say on my mouth. I'm not criticizing anything, have that very clear, i was just pointing a feature we already have with steam. Do i wrote about steam, don't I? well, you know... i'm very critic, errr ups.. oh no! i have 676 games on Steam!! LOL
5. You should be proud that i will ignore you. I don't like to be trolled so many times .
For me this is great, xbox 360 huge piracy will be killed in one shoot, and Shops like gamestop will never take profit from second hand games because they are killing that market. And, If you have a cheecky, rotter or cad friend, asking you for a game you own, you will need to give him your console in order to play the game he want to play, so the "lending games practise" will be killed aswell. If you want to play a game, you MUST pay for a copy, a on top of that, you MUST have internet yes or yes. So these new consoles WILL BE like to buy an actual PC but with a pad... and PCs have pads aswell. And with that, i'm just pointing a fact everybody should think of well.
In the article there's a comparison between the actual online services, with steam big picture as the winner.
Other than that, if i paid for a game, i would like to be able to play the same game on the new videoconsole/platform. With a PC we don't have that issue, and do you know what? at the end, a majority of users tend to use a PC to emulate games from ps2 as example (there are ps3 emulators already).
If i were criticizing anything, i would be doing it with the actual DLC pricing . I paid 25 in preorder for skyrim (yes, PC Games are the cheapest :poly121:), and i will never pay 20 for the latest dlc as i said in the dragonborn thread.
And don't worry about codenames such as durango, orbis, etc. All the cpus, gpus have their codenames and they are just only that, a codename. Nobody says "i have a kepler GK104"... maybe just a freak.
Actually i already see the new DRM not serving MS and Sony very well, especially those games that have a 10 hour SP and not a lot more especially if the prices go up. Tanking 80 bucks and not beeing able to pass them on, makes me (and a lot others) think 4 times about purchasing an item at full price, especially since it will kill the rental business. On Steam i already just purchase game i will get a certain amount of hours in SP or MP out or are heavily price reduced. Even if i had more cash on hands, iam just not willed to waste my money.
With that concept i see a couple of studios dying that are just producing "give it a rent" and "play it once and forget" games. That will be quite hard in the future.
The DLC prices get redicilious if you pay 8 bucks for a 3 Song addon on Rocksmith or 3 bucks for every single song. Thats 3 times what i pay for the songs on itunes. I know there is more effort in tabbing them and stuff...but 3 bucks? are they kidding me? This is getting out of hand.
The real casualty is retail, because they make the money they need to stay afloat through used game sales (and it has always been this way, it's not like this is something that has happened recently). I'm not sure that MS/Sony want to be killing retail off, I'm sure it accounts for a significant chunk of customers.
Replies
I believe it to be true. Compulsory Kinect and online activation = no purchase for me. I only purchase games with online activation now because I can bypass it with a crack (and burn said crack to a disk and keep it in the box with the game).
It mostly demonstrates Microsoft's complete ignorance of the state of the Internet outside of the US. (Not that we didn't know that anyway with their pitiful Live offerings.)
First off its cheap hardware costs wise, probably costs Microsoft $40 or less for each one.
Second, developers can assume you now a kenetic with a built in microphone and camera. I'd expect more stuff take a picture/scan of your face and get it in game. But there could be other cool uses for it as well. Maybe a built in skype like program that works between multiple games so you can get a big hangout going, with video. Also skyrim style FOS-RO-DA shouts and other mic based features.
The hypothetical string will also be 10 times as long!
On a serious note though, frames can be rendered as quick as they can be written on the framebuffer as it always has been.
Gamedevelopers will also find reasons for rendering as much as they can as close as they can get to 30 fps, this is a constant in the push for fidelity, no matter how much hardware we push towards those FRAMES!!
I seriously doubt that. It's not like Kinect wasn't manufactured en-mass and sold at a loss, and it still cost a fortune. Kinect's successor will not be different.
This is all gimmicky crap that does nothing to benefit the majority of game titles, these aren't really benefits.
It's nice to have a microphone, but there's a reason we use headsets (it's so the microphone isn't on the other side of the room from the speaker, and the speaker doesn't have to raise their voice - and without that distance interference is much more minimal).
People seem to forget that the first online 360 games did have webcam support and that it was pulled for more than a few good reasons. The hangout idea isn't great either, because it'd be reliant on a huge amount of bandwidth for all that video that you really want to be used for your game.
Voice is disabled for anyone who doesn't have an English language console in current Kinect titles. Given that Microsoft has repeatedly proven totally US centric, this won't change and developers won't bother to use that feature. To top it off, voice based control systems are never really going to work because players don't want to sit around yelling at their TV. Even if they did, a normal headset microphone is once again a cheaper and superior option.
To top it off, anyone outside the USA who isn't super-wealthy usually struggles to find space to actually play kinect games anyway. I have a large living space and it still isn't enough... and then the lighting conditions or something aren't ideal either and it doesn't work properly regardless. I doubt this is also going to change.
Finally, I haven't encountered a single Kinect game worth paying for yet. My library contains all first party Kinect titles to date (except that Nike fitness one), and they're far from great. I did enjoy the Gunstringer, but it's not £50 retail fare. Fable: The Journey is quite good, but it is also painfully flawed.
You never know, companies do some crazy things.
Plus, historically whenever a company starts to feel like they're running the show / leading the charge they get stupid. It happened to Nintendo (see N64/cartridges), it happened to Sony(see PS3/$599), its bound to happen to MS.
I worked for Microsoft for long enough to know that this is exactly the kind of thing that they will do.
It's the exact opposite. Curbing used game sales dramatically reduces game retailer potential earnings. The margins on new games as a retailer are really small. Either retailers will suffer and close, or retailers will pass on the costs to the customer. The only winner is Microsoft / Sony.
*insert blame for other world object here*
I don't think Sony would follow MS on this one, they've got way too much to prove with this coming generation to take such a risk.
That's the thing, the minute one system comes out first and says that, all the other one has to do is say "hey, we're not doing that, c'mon check us out." I doubt either side would allow their competitor that advantage.
Nov 13th 2010
"Based on a recent teardown conducted by UBM TechInsights, it looks like the most expensive part of Microsoft's Kinect is the box it comes in. According to UBM TechInsights, the Kinect contains about $56 worth of hardware. Around $17 of that cost is attributed to the PrimeSense motion detection system, including the microphones, cameras and processor.
Of course, the $56 figure doesn't include manufacturing costs (not to mention some undoubtedly massive marketing costs). It's also worth noting that UBM's assessment is just an estimate and only Microsoft knows the real cost. Still, assuming the figure is even close to accurate, it would seem Microsoft makes an impressive chunk of change from the $150 price."
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/11/13/kinect-hardware-worth-56-according-to-teardown/
I think all your points are valid, I just wanted to address these 2. To a developer, there's a big difference most people having a piece of hardware, and everyone having it. You obviously do not want to alienate your audience by spending time on a feature not everyone can use. I've always hated squad controls in video games like Mass Effect. I only used it when I kept on dying in certain spots. I think it'd be great to be able to tell your ai to fall back or push or tell them to throw a grenade. A lot of people don't want to have to wear a headset for a single player game. And the hardware cost for a mic is really minimal. Of course voice controls tend to be buggy, but having a mic gives features like this a better chance of being explored and developed.
The webcam for the xbox failed because it was kinda expensive, and there wasn't many games that used it. Maybe 3 arcade games and one (Tony Hawk?) that allowed you to use your face in game. I just think it'd be sweet if game with character creation allow you to use the 3d scanning feature of the kenetic to automatically tweak the "sliders" to match your face. Again I just feel like these things are way more likely to be explored by dev's if everyone has one. Of course it's completely ignorable as well, and I dont' think many games should rely on it.
The US ranks fairly low in speed, penetration and price, so I'm confused.
Net Index
I wonder if this has anything to do with the console ban being lifted in China.
They seem to have forgotten that it also came with a bundled with a game. I also believe a large part of the cost of Kinect is an attempt at absorbing the cost of developing the software to go with it. The successor will be cheaper for sure, but that's still a ~$50 addition to the hardware a lot of people don't even want, let alone pay for.
This is true, but as a developer you also don't want to waste time (ergo, lots of money) developing niche features that only supplement the game in a minor way. A lot of the time the only things that make use of these features are first party tech demos for a reason.
It's worse than that - not only are they unreliable, they're also a far slower form of input. In your Mass Effect example, the time it would take to say a simple command like "Kaiden, Grenade, Banshee" in a clear and processable manner is pretty horrific - it's something like 4-5 seconds not including the time it takes for the character to perform the action. In Mass Effect you have to determine which character is performing the action, what action to perform, and what target to go for - this is all more easily performed with normal control schemes (on the PC it was pretty easy since it all used the mouse). You also have to have a minimum of two syllables in each word for them to be interpetable, can't have any two words that are pronounced vaguely similarly, and likely will need to pause between statements. It's nasty if the control is going to require anything other than one word. If it doesn't work for whatever reason and you have to repeat yourself, you're probably dead anyway.
There's an RTS game on the 360 that has an option for pure voice control whose name I forget. Even when the voice commands worked fluidly (and they often didn't), players quickly realised that using the voice control scheme was simply too slow to react to the game and reverted to using the pad anyway.
Kinect's level of fidelity is pretty low and the successor probably won't be much better, you'd probably end up with some hideous amalgamation much akin to what you get out of Face Invaders on the 3DS (whose camera setup is not all that disimilar). Moreover, it'll go the dodo the same way as the 360 camera because it's only a matter of time before people start scanning their genitals, dogs arse, or whatever other inappropriateness they can come up with that circumvents whatever control algorithms are used to try and stop that sort of thing.
EDIT:
It ranks better than almost all other countries where Live is available. The UK is apparently ranked better than the US, but I suspect that's a quirk of the data thanks to London. Internet availabilty outside of a few major cities isn't great, and in large parts of the country isn't any better than it was ten years ago.
Live isn't available in half of Europe (still), or the Middle East despite promises to the contrary made a couple of years ago. Unless they improve their availability, requiring online activations will cut out a huge quantity of people - but they won't care because half their business or more is the USA anyway.
Nah, they'd have had to have planned for the infrastructure years ago, long before a console ban lift was even rumoured.
Were you thinking of End War? Even if you weren't, you described the voice control system perfectly.
I agree that we're a long ways from having reliable, and more importantly, quick input other than physical input.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/07/japanese-newspaper-claims-playstation-4-will-cost-about-400
I can't wait till the 20th.
What do you mean? The PS3 has done quite well; sure the XBox is slightly more popular but it's not because of lack of quality from SONY's side... the 360 has always been about the multiplayer whereas the PS3 has been more of a single player experience console, that's all.
I agree with all of their guesses in that video clip about the up comming conference.
1. No price or date
2. Nothing playable
3. Short, under 1 hour presentation
4. Games will be shown
5. Dualshock like controller.
They're doing fine now, but this generation has seen them go from basically the industry leader to 3rd place. The situation with Vita atm isn't doing wonders for their reputation either.
Aye, blu-ray is no longer that new so I definitely do not think they'll be getting away with $600.
To bad for us euros. 700-800 bucks for us. Easy
Almost double the US prices, and six months later
The European market is always getting fucked by nearly all vendors... So it shouldn't come as a surprise if the PS4 is crazy expensive.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/6/3958162/valve-steam-box-cake
And why would you do that on a PS4 thread? No doubt SteamBox will be awesome for sure, but it's a whole other league.
Steambox seems to be doing that... less restrictive and it can change the game for the console market. Seems relevant to me. But hey... this would not be the first time i am wrong in the interwebs.
The steam box is pretty relevant, Glottis8 has reason, and i say there's no doubt it will be another option for the end consumer.
BTW, xbox 720 and ps4 will have a stronger and draconian DRM, games will be "soul binded" to an account and to a hardware, and you will need internet in order to link your games to you account and hardware. It will be like to have a PC with Steam
Hope they go with PS4 or just Playstation. Really hope they dont do something stupid like getting rid of the Playstation brand name, but honestly, Sony constantly makes stupid decisions like that so I wont hold my breath.
Even Playstation Orbis is dumb.
What are you referring to here? I mean, we've got the Playstation, Playstation 2, Playstation 3, Playstation Portable...yeah the Vita is a little weird, but how do they have a history of naming things idiotically? Do they tend to do weird stuff outside of their game consoles I don't know about?
Though, even if they did name it the Orbis, nothing will ever be as dumb as going from "Revolution" to "Wii".
The only problem with the name 'Nintendo Revolution' is that its so good they'd have had a hard time following it up with future consoles
They were gonna call the Gamecube 'Dolphin', I think we're safe on the Orbis/Durango front. :thumbup:
1. Specs that are doubled or even quadrupled do not qualify as 'more of the same'.
2. The PS3 is in no way 500 euro in Europe. What you described sells for 350 in stores these days. There's been talk of a decent Steambox costing 1000 dollars; or around 800 euro.
3. While the fact that Valve is releasing a console is interesting, you could argue against it being relevant. I already have a steambox; it's called my PC. It's even hooked up to my telly.
4. Steam INVENTED what you are now criticizing here; DRM that binds a purchase to an account. Why is it OK when Steam does it on a PC but not when a console manufacturer does it?
I don't have any issue with digital distribution of console games or the DRM that comes with it. However, steam has been particularly good at making sure I have access to my purchases. When digital distribution was new I bought a few games on fileplanet's service which I can no longer install or play. Similarly, I bought music on itunes and after losing a hard drive was no longer able to get access to it. I have very little faith that most companies wont change their policys or later try to find new ways to minimize the value of what I have bought.
Games bought online on the PS3 or Xbox haven't disappeared on people so I see no reason why it would start with the next consoles.
1. Doubled or not, for a PC user and for all users, games will stay in the same generation, because the horsepower is like to have one of the cheapest videocards on the market, and with that, you CAN'T move the best PC games with ultra settings on PC (ported with pc features only or not ported). Which is the point you don't understand? and you were the one who wanted me to think you are a PC gamer? hehe
2. Like i said, the ps3 is sold here "AROUND" 499 (there are several versions), prices varies a lot, and of course, you can find a ~350 version without a game. A slim version with 12gb only, costs more than 200 euro HERE. I don't know why you are arguing me that, it's pointless, "arguing all" is your sport? :thumbdown:
3. I have several PCs, and all have more horsepower than a "better" steam box. Did you read the article? cuz the steam box will bring us a "PC Console". There will be a "good", "better", and "best" version. Read the article, it's a good read...
4. It seems like you don't know how to read, you imagine things, or simplily you like to put words i didn't say on my mouth. I'm not criticizing anything, have that very clear, i was just pointing a feature we already have with steam. Do i wrote about steam, don't I? well, you know... i'm very critic, errr ups.. oh no! i have 676 games on Steam!! LOL
5. You should be proud that i will ignore you. I don't like to be trolled so many times
For me this is great, xbox 360 huge piracy will be killed in one shoot, and Shops like gamestop will never take profit from second hand games because they are killing that market. And, If you have a cheecky, rotter or cad friend, asking you for a game you own, you will need to give him your console in order to play the game he want to play, so the "lending games practise" will be killed aswell. If you want to play a game, you MUST pay for a copy, a on top of that, you MUST have internet yes or yes. So these new consoles WILL BE like to buy an actual PC but with a pad... and PCs have pads aswell. And with that, i'm just pointing a fact everybody should think of well.
In the article there's a comparison between the actual online services, with steam big picture as the winner.
Other than that, if i paid for a game, i would like to be able to play the same game on the new videoconsole/platform. With a PC we don't have that issue, and do you know what? at the end, a majority of users tend to use a PC to emulate games from ps2 as example (there are ps3 emulators already).
If i were criticizing anything, i would be doing it with the actual DLC pricing
And don't worry about codenames such as durango, orbis, etc. All the cpus, gpus have their codenames and they are just only that, a codename. Nobody says "i have a kepler GK104"... maybe just a freak.
With that concept i see a couple of studios dying that are just producing "give it a rent" and "play it once and forget" games. That will be quite hard in the future.
The DLC prices get redicilious if you pay 8 bucks for a 3 Song addon on Rocksmith or 3 bucks for every single song. Thats 3 times what i pay for the songs on itunes. I know there is more effort in tabbing them and stuff...but 3 bucks? are they kidding me? This is getting out of hand.
It's almost like MS is trying to fail.
Cheers
"I ca’t reveal the price of the next generation PlayStation yet, but I can say that it rhymes with “Mive Mundred and Mighty Mine US Dollars”"