from gamasutra:
"UPDATED: OXM's John Hicks has stated via Twitter that "At no point when I was talking to MS did they say there was a fee for used games." The publication suggested that game installation installs would be tied with a player's account, and players who sell their discs will be able to deactivate the license, removing the need for a second-hand owner to pay a fee."
them rumors...
Sony won on handling the always on and anti used games rumors, nobody even remembers that being a thing now.
I hope this mistake costs Microsoft. A cost to a point that maybe their arrogance will subside and we can see a glimmer of humility and respect for indie devs. Of course this a a pipe dream.
The name sucks so bad but I wonder if its a clever subconscious device. The more I hear it the more I hear 'Xbox won,' which implores superiority over ps4 haha. Could be a useful saying in the coming months.
I hope this mistake costs Microsoft. A cost to a point that maybe their arrogance will subside and we can see a glimmer of humility and respect for indie devs. Of course this a a pipe dream.
<sarcasm>Yeah, and hopefully they'll cancel the Rare project and lay off a bunch of developers</sarcasm>
Yeah I commented on that earlier about it having two suns! Both are still fake effects as well, I would have for some true volumetric stuff.
GUYS, WE HAVEN'T BEEN TOLD THE WHOLE STORY YET.
"In the not-too-distant future, a devastating attack has forever changed the global balance of power, with the United States no longer recognized as a superpower."
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but what would have been a better direction?
Likely if it was just an all-around better version of the last xbox people would have complained like they complain whenever a new iPhone or Call of Duty game comes out.
Hey lets quickly jump to conclusions and be a bunch of assholes cause that is a great plan. Microsoft is so evil. Ooooh down with Microsoft. They don't care about me as a gamer... Oh burn em! Close em down. Lay em all off.
Indies can't self publish. (FOR NOW) Remember when live arcade games were restricted in size for the download. It got bigger, and bigger. Oh yeah things can change... The damn consoles not even in stores yet or anyones hands and yet here we go on the witch hunt.
You wanna know who else doesn't care about you?
Apple, Samsung, Sony, Nintendo, Dell, Toshiba, the NFL, Major League Baseball, COX Cable, Time Warner, Comcast, Amazon, Best Buy, Target, Walmart, McDonalds, Burger King, KFC.... and your parents...
Seriously, E3 is less than 3 weeks away. Games will be showed then. Stop your whining. Funny that you guys bitch about all the bastard kids on xbox live screaming and yet here you are acting not much different.
Yeah that about sums it up.
Was it the most interesting presentation? No. Could they have showed more games. Sure. Sony also could have showed us more stuff as well but they didn't. A few months later and no ones cares. If gamers are too dumb that they can't tell the difference between Xbox: One and the original Xbox then well perhaps playing more video games isn't really in their best interests to start with. I don't know maybe I'm just going about all of this wrong.
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but what would have been a better direction?
For starters, they needed to announce a box with less hardware power. Between 4 and 6 Gigs of RAM instead of 8. This might not be a popular approach for some developers, but the simple fact of the matter is that hardware processing power never translates into market success. The Wii wasn't the most powerful console. Neither was the PS2, or the PS1. Compromising on power to make a more reasonable, affordable box would have been a better choice.
Personally, I'm okay with making the Kinect more integral to the system. That is an interesting approach, and has some promise. But that only gives them more incentive to compromise elsewhere. A peripheral like the Kinect is going to boost the potential cost of the system. Making it necessary for the system to run makes it that much more important to cut costs elsewhere.
Focus on the developers. This early, Microsoft didn't really need to worry about the general audience. And they certainly didn't need to present the content that they did. EA's sports franchises? Call of Duty? These were the most obvious releases possible. None of that is going to inspire confidence in developers. And developers are what the XBox One needs more than anything else right now. Microsoft needed to demonstrate why developers should be flocking to their new console, and they failed.
PowerPC chip architecture. Microsoft is switching over to x86 for the XBox One. Why? It only weakens their position, while offering benefits to their competition.
As an indie developer, it bums me out that Indies still can't self publish. I hope they change their stance. Luckily Battlecars was successful for us on PSN, but we'd like to bring the entire experience to everyone. Did Microsoft say anything about if we still have to pay a heavy price for updating/patching our games?
Snagged this verbatim from a reddit post, this guy basically echoes my thoughts exactly:
"More people need to realize this is a push to make Xbox the only thing you need plugged into your TV. Xbox knows they can make a killer system for "hardcore gamers", and included all the hardware inside that they need to. This announcement was to show off the entertainment Hub capabilities of the system. E3 is going to be more geared towards the gamer.
Why do you think the first thing they showed off at the announcement was the TV capabilities? Why is it called Xbox One? Why were sports talked about more than gaming? They are expanding the gaining system into an entertainment system. Getting current console gamers to buy the new model is stagnant growth. They are trying to expand the customer base, by attracting people who do not even game.
You also have to look at what Apple and Google are doing. They are both trying to get in the fight for the living room. Look up what jobs said he "envisions" for TV. Its what the One does, but even better. The One is designed to block Apple out of the living room."
I'm trying to find it right now, but I read an article that basically says that we're nearing the end of high-performance gaming console, if I can find the article I'll post it here, but it was basically some tech analysts saying that to survive, the set-top gaming systems are going to have to do more than just games, hence the ONE title for the new Xbox.
I'm a bit disappointed, as I'm seeing a lot of comments that remind me more of the youtube comment section than actual, rational discussion among professionals in the industry.
EDIT: Every time I watch that .gif I laugh harder.....good lord.
Jesse : If wanting a new console to have games as a priority is wrong, then I don't want to be right. This was their first impression and their chance to get everyone excited about their new console - and they face planted by appealing to dude bros and people who spend all of their time watching TV.
Jesse : If wanting a new console to have games as a priority is wrong, then I don't want to be right. This was their first impression and their chance to get everyone excited about their new console - and they face planted by appealing to dude bros and people who spend all of their time watching TV.
but we already know they can make an amazing gaming console I guess is my point.
It's like meeting a super hot chick. You already know she's gonna get you rock hard but what else is there to her?
The details leaking out are terrible though, you have to admit. Leaving aside the games issue ... calling home every 24 hours, no indie games, no sharing games with friends ... basically every time they open their mouths, it's another middle finger in your face.
They almost seem aggressively hateful towards gamers.
Unless this thing absolutely blows my socks off at E3, I think I'm going PS4 this generation.
I agree. The have to connect to the net is bs. When I was in the Navy we didn't have access to the net on ship. So that would easily change my mind on what I was gonna get. I think in theory good idea to stop Gamestop in a way but until we hear the full details and can rest then perhaps being a bit reserved is ok.
but we already know they can make an amazing gaming console I guess is my point.
It's like meeting a super hot chick. You already know she's gonna get you rock hard but what else is there to her?
Well one good point i've seen made is that Xbox 360 is actually one of the only things Microsoft has done well for the past years. Surface, Windows Phone, etc.. (seriously i can't think of all of them just because they didn't become popular).
It's not hate or anything from me, no "microsoft sucks", just that really, their products despite not being "bad" have failed to capture the market and live up to expectations.
Also, did anyone read the piece by John Riccitiello on Kotaku? it's pretty good.
He talks about what he feels the new consoles should get right. Right now, Microsoft makes it look like they're getting 2 of those wrong, or at least they're not trying to disprove or counter it...
Yes it's too soon to fully judge, but in times like these you'd imagine they think their first impression through really well and go for maximum positive impact. Yesterday I thought this new Xbox would be pretty cool and I was sure I was gonna want one. Now, the competitors sound like a much better option to me.
I honestly want to know why Kinect & TV integration is so much worse than PS4's share button & move. When I bought the PS3 it had linux support, I had no interest in that but I didn't rage about it either.
I honestly want to know why Kinect & TV integration is so much worse than PS4's share button & move.
Move has never been made a default part of the system. You aren't required to plug in a Playstation Eye in order to run your system. And perhaps most importantly, the cost of producing move controllers or Playstation Eyes has never been added to the base system package.
With the new Kinect, it will be required. And that means it will be bundled with every console. The cost of producing it will likewise be added to every console. The system will overall be more expensive for its presence.
If you have the disposable income, it's not so bad. But it will definitely make the system more expensive, and thus harder to market. And that will help to insure a slow launch and a small install base for its first year on the market.
They could have offset that expense by cutting corners in other areas. But then they announced the HDMI pass-through, 8 Gigs of RAM, and 500 Gig hard drive. They aren't cutting back at all. I'm seriously concerned that the XBox One is going to be the most expensive out of the three next-gen systems. Microsoft needs to beat whatever price Sony puts on the PS4. With this strategy, they won't.
Move has never been made a default part of the system. You aren't required to plug in a Playstation Eye in order to run your system. And perhaps most importantly, the cost of producing move controllers or Playstation Eyes has never been added to the base system package.
In 2010 the hardware costs of the orginal kinect was a projected $50, I wouldn't be surprised if it was less now.
Microsoft Corp.'s Kinect motion-gaming add on for its Xbox 360 gaming platform carries a bill-of-materials (BOM) of roughly $56 and features chips made by PrimeSense Ltd., Marvell Technology Group Ltd., Texas Instruments Inc. and STMicroelectronics NV, according to a teardown analysis performed by UBM TechInsights.
Is the Playstation Eye not being sold with every console? I believe it is "PS4 will come with a new PlayStation 4 Eye camera in the box" -Eurogamer
The fact of the matter is that they're trying to increase profit by creating a product that appeals to a much broader audience. We as gamers are starting to feel alienated and unimportant I think. They're trying to create an entertainment console, not just a gaming console so that EVERYONE will almost have to buy one. By making the horrible, half assed presentation cater towards more of the entertainment console side, and not the gaming side the people who are actually more interested in the game console, we're pissed.
And to add to the hillarity, Microsoft says that they're currently developing newer IP's, taking more risks and have more games in development tahn ever before, and then shows COD haha. Herchburg says (im paraphrasing here) "We're done playing it safe, we're going to take more risks".....then goes on to show us COD. Don't blow smoke up our ass with "we're making newer, better IP's" then show us COD. Show us a new, and incredible IP.
They could not have done this presentation anymore prematurely than they did.
haha jesse seriously? So you insulted pretty much everyone in this forum, and then gamers in general in one post.
I agree with Jesse... It's a given that the next console will play games. It makes sense to show what else it can do, in addition to what we all know it'll be capable of.
In 2010 the hardware costs of the orginal kinect was a projected $50, I wouldn't be surprised if it was less now.
$50 is quite a lot given the R&D costs they had to cover. The software bill attached to Kinect was probably more than $50 again.
The new kinect has much higher resolution / frequency sensors and does a lot more. Needless to say it won't come cheap and is going to be adding $75+ to the base cost of the unit whether you want it or not.
Also, if it breaks, it may not be replaceable given it's part of the base package.
Most importantly though - why does it have to be plugged in for the console to function?. People really need to be answering this question because the answer cannot be good.
There are two things I can think of:
1) The console UI cannot be operated using a controller (really?).
2) They're using the hardware to monitor you.
Only the second one sounds reasonable. Unless anyone else has any bright ideas, then it makes even more sense when you consider that the damned thing has to be conneced to the Internet at least once a day. Microsoft are recording something when that console is running.
A device, with a constant connection to the internet, that requires a camera that is always on and listening should be a concern.
But anyone with a kinect now already has this. No one is hacking kinects and streaming your living rooms video feed. What else is there to be concerned about.
haha jesse seriously? So you insulted pretty much everyone in this forum, and then gamers in general in one post.
Really? Insulted everyone in this forum? Uh no, not even close. If you want to take the approach and think that I was talking about you then I probably was.
Could you possibly tell us more about how you hate COD? I don't think we quite understand it yet.
Seems like a fine console, not sure what all the butt hurt is about. This event was strictly for revealing it with general info.
Microsoft specifically stated at the start and end of the conference that E3 was where they would shown off the games and give more details about the unit. There's an overwhelming sense on the internet that people are unaware of this or are ignoring it.
I have sympathy for indie's, it doesn't sound all that great. But, if Sony and Valve continue upping their game on that front I would venture to guess it would force MS's hand more.
I can unplug my Kinect when I want to play non-kinect games or watch TV, and my 360 doesn't need to connect to the Internet every day. This combo of features is worrying.
There is no legitimate reason I can find for the requirement for Kinect to be plugged in at all times.
Replies
"UPDATED: OXM's John Hicks has stated via Twitter that "At no point when I was talking to MS did they say there was a fee for used games." The publication suggested that game installation installs would be tied with a player's account, and players who sell their discs will be able to deactivate the license, removing the need for a second-hand owner to pay a fee."
them rumors...
Sony won on handling the always on and anti used games rumors, nobody even remembers that being a thing now.
I'm with Stubbles on this. I think it's going to do just fine....
and this one... not confirmed.. but interesting as well..
http://www.vgleaks.com/durango-memory-system-overview/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-22-microsoft-wont-let-indies-self-publish-on-xbox-one
............. I'm gonna go make a new foil hat
everyone is competing with Apple
Yeah I commented on that earlier about it having two suns! Both are still fake effects as well, I would have for some true volumetric stuff.
honestly I'm sure its was a "crunch" type mistake ya know.
I like the name Xbone, it's funner to say than the Xbox One.
<sarcasm>Yeah, and hopefully they'll cancel the Rare project and lay off a bunch of developers</sarcasm>
pfffff fucking hate gamer sentiments like this
No credit needed.
Yeah it's a pretty obvious mistake, but maybe this new COD does take place on a planet with dual suns, seems innovative in that way. :P
GUYS, WE HAVEN'T BEEN TOLD THE WHOLE STORY YET.
"In the not-too-distant future, a devastating attack has forever changed the global balance of power, with the United States no longer recognized as a superpower."
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but what would have been a better direction?
Likely if it was just an all-around better version of the last xbox people would have complained like they complain whenever a new iPhone or Call of Duty game comes out.
Again, I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
Indies can't self publish. (FOR NOW) Remember when live arcade games were restricted in size for the download. It got bigger, and bigger. Oh yeah things can change... The damn consoles not even in stores yet or anyones hands and yet here we go on the witch hunt.
You wanna know who else doesn't care about you?
Apple, Samsung, Sony, Nintendo, Dell, Toshiba, the NFL, Major League Baseball, COX Cable, Time Warner, Comcast, Amazon, Best Buy, Target, Walmart, McDonalds, Burger King, KFC.... and your parents...
Seriously, E3 is less than 3 weeks away. Games will be showed then. Stop your whining. Funny that you guys bitch about all the bastard kids on xbox live screaming and yet here you are acting not much different.
Yeah that about sums it up.
Was it the most interesting presentation? No. Could they have showed more games. Sure. Sony also could have showed us more stuff as well but they didn't. A few months later and no ones cares. If gamers are too dumb that they can't tell the difference between Xbox: One and the original Xbox then well perhaps playing more video games isn't really in their best interests to start with. I don't know maybe I'm just going about all of this wrong.
Where's my pitchfork and torch?
For starters, they needed to announce a box with less hardware power. Between 4 and 6 Gigs of RAM instead of 8. This might not be a popular approach for some developers, but the simple fact of the matter is that hardware processing power never translates into market success. The Wii wasn't the most powerful console. Neither was the PS2, or the PS1. Compromising on power to make a more reasonable, affordable box would have been a better choice.
Personally, I'm okay with making the Kinect more integral to the system. That is an interesting approach, and has some promise. But that only gives them more incentive to compromise elsewhere. A peripheral like the Kinect is going to boost the potential cost of the system. Making it necessary for the system to run makes it that much more important to cut costs elsewhere.
Focus on the developers. This early, Microsoft didn't really need to worry about the general audience. And they certainly didn't need to present the content that they did. EA's sports franchises? Call of Duty? These were the most obvious releases possible. None of that is going to inspire confidence in developers. And developers are what the XBox One needs more than anything else right now. Microsoft needed to demonstrate why developers should be flocking to their new console, and they failed.
PowerPC chip architecture. Microsoft is switching over to x86 for the XBox One. Why? It only weakens their position, while offering benefits to their competition.
In the mean time this kills me.
"More people need to realize this is a push to make Xbox the only thing you need plugged into your TV. Xbox knows they can make a killer system for "hardcore gamers", and included all the hardware inside that they need to. This announcement was to show off the entertainment Hub capabilities of the system. E3 is going to be more geared towards the gamer.
Why do you think the first thing they showed off at the announcement was the TV capabilities? Why is it called Xbox One? Why were sports talked about more than gaming? They are expanding the gaining system into an entertainment system. Getting current console gamers to buy the new model is stagnant growth. They are trying to expand the customer base, by attracting people who do not even game.
You also have to look at what Apple and Google are doing. They are both trying to get in the fight for the living room. Look up what jobs said he "envisions" for TV. Its what the One does, but even better. The One is designed to block Apple out of the living room."
I'm trying to find it right now, but I read an article that basically says that we're nearing the end of high-performance gaming console, if I can find the article I'll post it here, but it was basically some tech analysts saying that to survive, the set-top gaming systems are going to have to do more than just games, hence the ONE title for the new Xbox.
I'm a bit disappointed, as I'm seeing a lot of comments that remind me more of the youtube comment section than actual, rational discussion among professionals in the industry.
EDIT: Every time I watch that .gif I laugh harder.....good lord.
but we already know they can make an amazing gaming console I guess is my point.
It's like meeting a super hot chick. You already know she's gonna get you rock hard but what else is there to her?
They almost seem aggressively hateful towards gamers.
Unless this thing absolutely blows my socks off at E3, I think I'm going PS4 this generation.
Some take it to other lengths though...
Well one good point i've seen made is that Xbox 360 is actually one of the only things Microsoft has done well for the past years. Surface, Windows Phone, etc.. (seriously i can't think of all of them just because they didn't become popular).
It's not hate or anything from me, no "microsoft sucks", just that really, their products despite not being "bad" have failed to capture the market and live up to expectations.
Also, did anyone read the piece by John Riccitiello on Kotaku? it's pretty good.
He talks about what he feels the new consoles should get right. Right now, Microsoft makes it look like they're getting 2 of those wrong, or at least they're not trying to disprove or counter it...
Yes it's too soon to fully judge, but in times like these you'd imagine they think their first impression through really well and go for maximum positive impact. Yesterday I thought this new Xbox would be pretty cool and I was sure I was gonna want one. Now, the competitors sound like a much better option to me.
Move has never been made a default part of the system. You aren't required to plug in a Playstation Eye in order to run your system. And perhaps most importantly, the cost of producing move controllers or Playstation Eyes has never been added to the base system package.
With the new Kinect, it will be required. And that means it will be bundled with every console. The cost of producing it will likewise be added to every console. The system will overall be more expensive for its presence.
If you have the disposable income, it's not so bad. But it will definitely make the system more expensive, and thus harder to market. And that will help to insure a slow launch and a small install base for its first year on the market.
They could have offset that expense by cutting corners in other areas. But then they announced the HDMI pass-through, 8 Gigs of RAM, and 500 Gig hard drive. They aren't cutting back at all. I'm seriously concerned that the XBox One is going to be the most expensive out of the three next-gen systems. Microsoft needs to beat whatever price Sony puts on the PS4. With this strategy, they won't.
In 2010 the hardware costs of the orginal kinect was a projected $50, I wouldn't be surprised if it was less now.
Is the Playstation Eye not being sold with every console? I believe it is "PS4 will come with a new PlayStation 4 Eye camera in the box" -Eurogamer
And to add to the hillarity, Microsoft says that they're currently developing newer IP's, taking more risks and have more games in development tahn ever before, and then shows COD haha. Herchburg says (im paraphrasing here) "We're done playing it safe, we're going to take more risks".....then goes on to show us COD. Don't blow smoke up our ass with "we're making newer, better IP's" then show us COD. Show us a new, and incredible IP.
They could not have done this presentation anymore prematurely than they did.
haha jesse seriously? So you insulted pretty much everyone in this forum, and then gamers in general in one post.
$50 is quite a lot given the R&D costs they had to cover. The software bill attached to Kinect was probably more than $50 again.
The new kinect has much higher resolution / frequency sensors and does a lot more. Needless to say it won't come cheap and is going to be adding $75+ to the base cost of the unit whether you want it or not.
Also, if it breaks, it may not be replaceable given it's part of the base package.
Most importantly though - why does it have to be plugged in for the console to function?. People really need to be answering this question because the answer cannot be good.
There are two things I can think of:
1) The console UI cannot be operated using a controller (really?).
2) They're using the hardware to monitor you.
Only the second one sounds reasonable. Unless anyone else has any bright ideas, then it makes even more sense when you consider that the damned thing has to be conneced to the Internet at least once a day. Microsoft are recording something when that console is running.
Edit: Goddamn ninja Autocons should be banned
But anyone with a kinect now already has this. No one is hacking kinects and streaming your living rooms video feed. What else is there to be concerned about.
Really? Insulted everyone in this forum? Uh no, not even close. If you want to take the approach and think that I was talking about you then I probably was.
Could you possibly tell us more about how you hate COD? I don't think we quite understand it yet.
Microsoft specifically stated at the start and end of the conference that E3 was where they would shown off the games and give more details about the unit. There's an overwhelming sense on the internet that people are unaware of this or are ignoring it.
I have sympathy for indie's, it doesn't sound all that great. But, if Sony and Valve continue upping their game on that front I would venture to guess it would force MS's hand more.
I can unplug my Kinect when I want to play non-kinect games or watch TV, and my 360 doesn't need to connect to the Internet every day. This combo of features is worrying.
There is no legitimate reason I can find for the requirement for Kinect to be plugged in at all times.