|
On June 15 2013 04:17 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 04:08 takingbackoj wrote:On June 15 2013 03:50 jinorazi wrote:
isnt it just more simple to offer digital copy and disc copy
make digital copy cheaper (no shipping, no mfg, no middleman), people will buyt the cheaper digital copy that cannot be resold.
problem solved, but no, lets make it more complicated! Not sure what you mean by this. Xbox One will have discs still as well for initial installation if you really want a disc for some reason As for Xbox's cloud system, I like what I am hearing so far and also like the fact that as it stands, Xbox One seems to have a high ceiling. I will listen to people's theories on forums but as far as business decisions and tech understanding, im willing to bet MS knows what its doing as opposed to forum goers. MS is spinning cloud buzzwords like mad, you shouldnt trust anything except a solid demonstration of a game WITH cloud vs a game WITHOUT cloud
What has MS done that would warrant my automatic distrust? I get it, a lot of people don't like the Xbox One but compared to any other company, MS is just as trustworthy as the rest of them. I could go around saying Sony is fos as well but I have no reason to believe that.
Fact is, MS is a huge company and one of the most profitable around. They didn't get that way through inept leadership and poor business practices. They may make mistakes occasionally but they know what they are doing just like any other major and successful company.
|
On June 15 2013 04:35 JimmiC wrote:That makes a ton of sense, I think people just like being mad and don't think about benefits, or logically.
A random pastebin allegedly from "a microsoft employee" using swear words every 2 sentences and making an argument anyone here could make.
Sure makes sense.
Even if it were true, all of it is based on "You'll get cheaper games if we do all that ! at 40$". Yeah... we'll see about that Microsoft. Steam still sell AAA at 60$ most of the time.
If that's the plan, say it. You can be terrible at PR but not that much that you have to be saved by an anonymous pastebin.
|
Assuming games will even be cheaper if Microsoft establishes a Steam-like service in the future (which I don't doubt they can, I just doubt we'll see cheaper games which many people here assume will happen because even on Steam, how long did it take Skyrim and several other AAA titles to reduce in price), can't Sony just do the same with their digital downloads in response, again, putting Sony ahead of MS? Please correct me if I'm wrong on this.
Edit: I believe 3rd party developers dictate price, so Sony doesn't manipulate prices for EA and Ubisoft, etc.. But still wouldn't make sense for 3rd party to go cheaper on MS if Sony has a higher installed base.
|
United States5162 Posts
There's obviously some cool features with game sharing that would require some kind of checks to prevent abuse, but the problem with 24 hour checks is that even though that will mean for 95%+ up-time for the vast majority of users, there's still going to be occasions where you lose internet for a few days at a time due to a storm, disaster, human stupidity. ect; and those are going to be the times when you want to play your games the most. If I get hit by a hurricane I'll likely be without any services for a few days and up to a few weeks. With a portable generator I could play my 360, but obviously not an Xbone.
I think if they implement something where you can go offline for extended periods of time while preventing abuse it would be a good system. Something where if you go 24 hours without checking in you can play your games, but anything your sharing becomes inactive. But actually lowering usability, as I don't see the extra features vs the potential headache as an improvement, while excluding a portion of the player base is just dumb and deserves all the backlash imo. I don't see why it's impossible to implement a system that can utilize always online while not requiring it to the determent of some players.
There's also the issue if something goes wrong on MS's end, which I think is inevitable considering every other example we have.
|
On June 15 2013 05:02 Myles wrote:
There's obviously some cool features with game sharing that would require some kind of checks to prevent abuse, but the problem with 24 hour checks is that even though that will mean for 95%+ up-time for the vast majority of users, there's still going to be occasions where you lose internet for a few days at a time due to a storm, disaster, human stupidity. ect; and those are going to be the times when you want to play your games the most. If I get hit by a hurricane I'll likely be without any services for a few days and up to a few weeks. With a portable generator I could play my 360, but obviously not an Xbone.
I think if they implement something where you can go offline for extended periods of time while preventing abuse it would be a good system. Something where if you go 24 hours without checking in you can play your games, but anything your sharing becomes inactive. But actually lowering usability, as I don't see the extra features vs the potential headache as an improvement, while excluding a portion of the player base is just dumb and deserves all the backlash imo. I don't see why it's impossible to implement a system that can utilize always online while not requiring it to the determent of some players.
Sure this is reasonable. I'm all for preventing abuse when it comes with no backlash.
|
On June 15 2013 04:56 takingbackoj wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 04:17 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 15 2013 04:08 takingbackoj wrote:On June 15 2013 03:50 jinorazi wrote:
isnt it just more simple to offer digital copy and disc copy
make digital copy cheaper (no shipping, no mfg, no middleman), people will buyt the cheaper digital copy that cannot be resold.
problem solved, but no, lets make it more complicated! Not sure what you mean by this. Xbox One will have discs still as well for initial installation if you really want a disc for some reason As for Xbox's cloud system, I like what I am hearing so far and also like the fact that as it stands, Xbox One seems to have a high ceiling. I will listen to people's theories on forums but as far as business decisions and tech understanding, im willing to bet MS knows what its doing as opposed to forum goers. MS is spinning cloud buzzwords like mad, you shouldnt trust anything except a solid demonstration of a game WITH cloud vs a game WITHOUT cloud What has MS done that would warrant my automatic distrust? I get it, a lot of people don't like the Xbox One but compared to any other company, MS is just as trustworthy as the rest of them. I could go around saying Sony is fos as well but I have no reason to believe that. Fact is, MS is a huge company and one of the most profitable around. They didn't get that way through inept leadership and poor business practices. They may make mistakes occasionally but they know what they are doing just like any other major and successful company.
Well, for one they are a company trying to make money by selling a product. Two, they are making quite extravagant claims. Three, if you automatically trust microsoft because they say it is true then I have a nice bridge to sell you. Honest, why would I lie?
Also, I don't trust Sony's words either if they make extravagant claims. Refer to my post earlier about the early claims of the cell processor in the PS3 being similar to the claims of MS's cloud for Xbone. I like to think that I am a logical thinking person with a rough understanding of the systems at play, which kinda leads me to not trust MS... or at least treat it with a heavy dose of skepticism.
PS: Out of curiosity, when you see a product on an infomercial, do you believe everything they say as they present it?
|
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper
|
On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper
It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need.
|
On June 15 2013 06:07 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need.
The Eye is pretty much just a camera but the kinect from a technical standpoint is well worth the money it's cost esp the new kinect for the XboxOne that shit is impressive from just a people who want to dick around and program things. I never really seriously considered the kinect useful for games outside of just voice commands, but as a remote for like tv and shit if accuracy is improved it wouldn't be half bad to laze about with it. Always been a problem with microsoft they love their developers they make great SDK kits etc things engineers will love but not really the laymen, and then they always have problems with PR and telling people how it will be useful.
|
On June 15 2013 06:27 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 06:07 Excludos wrote:On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need. The Eye is pretty much just a camera but the kinect from a technical standpoint is well worth the money it's cost esp the new kinect for the XboxOne that shit is impressive from just a people who want to dick around and program things. I never really seriously considered the kinect useful for games outside of just voice commands, but as a remote for like tv and shit if accuracy is improved it wouldn't be half bad to laze about with it. Always been a problem with microsoft they love their developers they make great SDK kits etc things engineers will love but not really the laymen, and then they always have problems with PR and telling people how it will be useful.
the problem is that alot of people do not want it, paying 100 bucks more for something you don't want is a good reason to buy the ps4. However as it looks now here in sweden the price (when you preorder) is the same
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 15 2013 04:27 JimmiC wrote:
Perhaps I'm naive, But whats so differnt about what xbox is doing with games compared to what ipod did with music. Why was their no outrage when you couldn't play your CD's on your ipod? OMG you had to keep your old cd player to play those (keep you 360 to play your 360 games). You couldn't hold an itunes song, so on and so forth. So I don't see the big deal. I think a lot of people wern't mad because it opened up the ability to dowload free music. Better known as stealing. But since it was a small amount people justified i to themselves. I'm sure Game makers and xbox are trying to protect them selves from this hence the DRM and Checkins.
Uh... I've only used iTunes once but I was able to burn a regular CD from it which meant it was as sharable as anything else.
Very few people are complaining that you can't play 360 games on an XBO, we know the reason why. You have like 13 different arguments jumbled together and none of them really come out right.
|
I feel like all this has to do with Apple's influence on MS. You can't just make a console, it has to be feature-laden until it becomes something new and different. Even the name wishes it were an Apple product, like the iBox or the iConsole.
Myles wrote:
There's also the issue if something goes wrong on MS's end, which I think is inevitable considering every other example we have.
This. No one expected PSN could or would be hacked until it was. What happens when an Xbox One owner puts his game in and it denies him service -- or asks him for an installation fee?
What makes people comfortable buying such a product that is 100% useless without constant outside service? And I've never even really heard of an installation fee for someone who owns, in hand, the software and hardware to install it on. This concept seems so problematic to me.
This console has all the portability of a desktop. It's not meant to ever leave the TV, or the internet. And yet, unlike a PC, you have no control over the software, or the hardware for that matter. Without service provided from MS and your ISP, literally every day, 7 days a week, your console becomes a thing of plastic and metals, a paperweight.
What MS has done is added unneeded liabilities that no customer needed or asked for. It's great that the DRM and spycam come with all those neat features that the "pastebin" articles mention. It's neat that the console know which controller you're holding -- but I think it'd be neater if my console just didn't have a ****ing camera on it (my 360 currently sits on my dresser and has a wonderful view of my bookshelf). Whatever fun things they happen to provide, it's still just a heavy-handed, problematic DRM system that no customer asked for.
|
as far as i have seen xbone is running on windows 8. is that just me who saw it wrong or is this true. because that means that the ps4 will greatly own the xbone. i am actually glad. finally done with the dumb console wars if 1 is actually better.
|
On June 15 2013 06:07 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need.
For the last time, every one keeps bringing this argument up but it's completely wrong.
The Xbox One is not a gaming console, it's a home entertainment system. The natural extension of the Xbox brand in line with Microsoft is complete home integration - computer, tablet, phone, television - which is in line with what Apple looks like, except Microsoft already has a HUGE hold of the television space because they have one of the three big consoles.
People have this image of Xbox as being a competitor with the Playstation, which for a while it was (kinda the reason it even existed in the first place), but Microsoft's goals are completely different than Sony's.
Microsoft is trying to leverage the Xbox brand to hit the television space (Apple TV anyone?) as well as continue its fight inside the gaming console space. This is in line with its goal to try and emulate Apple to a degree, and provide really strong integration services within your home. Look at how Microsoft has moved into the desktop, laptop, ultrabook, tablet and phone spaces nowadays. Look at the Smartglass technology Microsoft is trying to push. The difference between Microsoft and Apple though is that Apple has a smaller userbase, and Apple does not have the power of the Xbox brand.
Microsoft developed Xbox as a gaming console to compete with Sony. At least, I think that's the reason, but you can see how Microsoft's visions have shifted over the years (Windows Phone? Surface?), while Sony's hasn't really done anything that different.
So Microsoft has this Xbox console brand that has a huge hold on the gaming console space, something that will take Apple years and years to even dent if it tried, which it isn't. But Microsoft doesn't want Xbox to be a gaming console brand, it wants Xbox to represent an entertainment brand. Look at Xbox Video and Xbox Music.
Xbox is Microsoft's entertainment brand, but the Xbox 360 was just a gaming console with these other entertainment features included. Microsoft wants to change consumer perception with the One, (hence starting the numbers at 1 again), and make the Xbox brand an entertainment system with a helluva gaming component.
However, so many of you people completely miss this (blame microsoft's shitty marketing because they don't want to say this shit + all the drm crap i linked in the previous page). All you people want is a gaming console, and you can't accept that the successor isn't just another gaming console. Microsoft is saying, if you only want a gaming console, then go for the 360 or the PS4, but what we have with the Xbox One is an entertainment unit with all this other cool shit that is going to integrate into your entertainment space very well because you're already on Windows and we have Smartglass shit and all these other Windows devices or apps enabled to integrate with you, and has features that will make a lot of entertainment things more enjoyable (side-by-side fantasy pools, smartglass, other shit), as well as being a great gaming console (atm anyways) that will continue to bring you your gaming shit that you like.
Yes, you can argue that some of the features aren't exactly the greatest - the 24 hour online authentication should be 72 hours in my opinion - but the point is, the Xbox One brand has to have the Kinect things because all of these things are essential to the Xbox branding. Not as a gaming console, but as a home entertainment unit.
+ Show Spoiler +Also, it's pretty sad to see people using Xbone all the time - you do realize how sad you are to resort to name calling? Are you 5th graders? Grow up...
|
i get the feeling that this "xbox is a home entertainment system" is being over exaggerated. from what i can see ps4 does everything xbox does entertainment wise, yet xbox is pushing it as a "the future entertainment system" and ps4 says its a gaming console...yet, the features are the same, no?
|
Blisse your post is just wrong, over a lot of things.
Xbox is no more of an "entertainment brand" than any other console. Considering Sony already has netflix, sony pictures, sony's record label, etc etc.
Why is it the PS4 can work fine as a gaming console yet have all these features when the Xbox fails at all of them? Your post is just weird damage control that doesn't actually address any points and just attempts to give excuses. I'll give you one point though, you're better than Microsoft's PR at the moment.
|
Aren't there some TV partnerships like NFL ?
Not sure how its relevant outside the US though.
|
On June 15 2013 06:59 jinorazi wrote:
i get the feeling that this "xbox is a home entertainment system" is being over exaggerated. from what i can see ps4 does everything xbox does entertainment wise, yet xbox is pushing it as a "the future entertainment system" and ps4 says its a gaming console...yet, the features are the same, no?
Honestly, I remember reading a year or so ago a very convincing article about what direction Microsoft is heading towards with all their forays into all the different places (Zune and Surface) and how it related to their Windows branding. This is just a the logical conclusion I see from watching how Microsoft has pushed all their services.
The difference is kind of that Microsoft wants to market the One as an entertainment device with gaming on the side, while Sony wants to market the PS4 as a gaming console with some secondary entertainment features. This is the impression I get from all their horrible marketing and de-emphasis on gaming (assuming that MS actually has strategy here and didn't just screw up completely).
However, we can all distinctively see how Microsoft is trying to link everything together (laptop, desktop, phone, surface, smartglass, xbox). If someone can't see it then I don't know what to say to them. I just see the One as a logical step into competing with Apple TV again, except with already a lead with their huge market share on the gaming console space (which is tied with the television space).
|
On June 15 2013 06:48 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 06:07 Excludos wrote:On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need. For the last time, every one keeps bringing this argument up but it's completely wrong. The Xbox One is not a gaming console, it's a home entertainment system. The natural extension of the Xbox brand in line with Microsoft is complete home integration - computer, tablet, phone, television - which is in line with what Apple looks like, except Microsoft already has a HUGE hold of the television space because they have one of the three big consoles. People have this image of Xbox as being a competitor with the Playstation, which for a while it was (kinda the reason it even existed in the first place), but Microsoft's goals are completely different than Sony's. Microsoft is trying to leverage the Xbox brand to hit the television space (Apple TV anyone?) as well as continue its fight inside the gaming console space. This is in line with its goal to try and emulate Apple to a degree, and provide really strong integration services within your home. Look at how Microsoft has moved into the desktop, laptop, ultrabook, tablet and phone spaces nowadays. Look at the Smartglass technology Microsoft is trying to push. The difference between Microsoft and Apple though is that Apple has a smaller userbase, and Apple does not have the power of the Xbox brand. Microsoft developed Xbox as a gaming console to compete with Sony. At least, I think that's the reason, but you can see how Microsoft's visions have shifted over the years (Windows Phone? Surface?), while Sony's hasn't really done anything that different. So Microsoft has this Xbox console brand that has a huge hold on the gaming console space, something that will take Apple years and years to even dent if it tried, which it isn't. But Microsoft doesn't want Xbox to be a gaming console brand, it wants Xbox to represent an entertainment brand. Look at Xbox Video and Xbox Music. Xbox is Microsoft's entertainment brand, but the Xbox 360 was just a gaming console with these other entertainment features included. Microsoft wants to change consumer perception with the One, (hence starting the numbers at 1 again), and make the Xbox brand an entertainment system with a helluva gaming component. However, so many of you people completely miss this (blame microsoft's shitty marketing because they don't want to say this shit + all the drm crap i linked in the previous page). All you people want is a gaming console, and you can't accept that the successor isn't just another gaming console. Microsoft is saying, if you only want a gaming console, then go for the 360 or the PS4, but what we have with the Xbox One is an entertainment unit with all this other cool shit that is going to integrate into your entertainment space very well because you're already on Windows and we have Smartglass shit and all these other Windows devices or apps enabled to integrate with you, and has features that will make a lot of entertainment things more enjoyable (side-by-side fantasy pools, smartglass, other shit), as well as being a great gaming console (atm anyways) that will continue to bring you your gaming shit that you like. Yes, you can argue that some of the features aren't exactly the greatest - the 24 hour online authentication should be 72 hours in my opinion - but the point is, the Xbox One brand has to have the Kinect things because all of these things are essential to the Xbox branding. Not as a gaming console, but as a home entertainment unit. + Show Spoiler +Also, it's pretty sad to see people using Xbone all the time - you do realize how sad you resort to name calling? Are you 5th graders? Grow up...
First: xbone is almost the same as using ps4, we arent saying x-bone or anything. XBOne, XBone, xbone, all stand for xbox one, it is just shorter. Is it immature to call "Richard Cheney" "Dick Cheney"? Not really, no. It is immature if you say "Dick Cheney" then giggle afterwards though.
Second: Your entire rant about it being an "entertainment system" is pointless because the PS4 does everything that the xbone does. Oh, I guess PS4 doesnt snap in fantasy football updates or achievements for watching TV... and I suppose I do have to use a whole remote to switch to PS4 from TV. The PS4 has pretty much every other "entertainment" system feature that the xbone has.
Third: If the goal of the xbone is to be this single all-in-one-unit, then why do I need a 360? Why do I need smartglass or a tablet or a smartphone? Why do I need to have a cable box to use the TV features?
|
On June 15 2013 06:48 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2013 06:07 Excludos wrote:On June 15 2013 06:03 jinorazi wrote:
by the way, eye is not bundled with ps4 from what i hear. i'd imagine thats why its 100 cheaper It does have integrated ps move though, but no, the eye is not part of the bundle. I honestly can't fathom how ms can be as arrogant as to think people are willing to spend 100 bucks more on a console because it has a camera most of us doesn't want or need. For the last time, every one keeps bringing this argument up but it's completely wrong. The Xbox One is not a gaming console, it's a home entertainment system. The natural extension of the Xbox brand in line with Microsoft is complete home integration - computer, tablet, phone, television - which is in line with what Apple looks like, except Microsoft already has a HUGE hold of the television space because they have one of the three big consoles. People have this image of Xbox as being a competitor with the Playstation, which for a while it was (kinda the reason it even existed in the first place), but Microsoft's goals are completely different than Sony's. Microsoft is trying to leverage the Xbox brand to hit the television space (Apple TV anyone?) as well as continue its fight inside the gaming console space. This is in line with its goal to try and emulate Apple to a degree, and provide really strong integration services within your home. Look at how Microsoft has moved into the desktop, laptop, ultrabook, tablet and phone spaces nowadays. Look at the Smartglass technology Microsoft is trying to push. The difference between Microsoft and Apple though is that Apple has a smaller userbase, and Apple does not have the power of the Xbox brand. Microsoft developed Xbox as a gaming console to compete with Sony. At least, I think that's the reason, but you can see how Microsoft's visions have shifted over the years (Windows Phone? Surface?), while Sony's hasn't really done anything that different. So Microsoft has this Xbox console brand that has a huge hold on the gaming console space, something that will take Apple years and years to even dent if it tried, which it isn't. But Microsoft doesn't want Xbox to be a gaming console brand, it wants Xbox to represent an entertainment brand. Look at Xbox Video and Xbox Music. Xbox is Microsoft's entertainment brand, but the Xbox 360 was just a gaming console with these other entertainment features included. Microsoft wants to change consumer perception with the One, (hence starting the numbers at 1 again), and make the Xbox brand an entertainment system with a helluva gaming component. However, so many of you people completely miss this (blame microsoft's shitty marketing because they don't want to say this shit + all the drm crap i linked in the previous page). All you people want is a gaming console, and you can't accept that the successor isn't just another gaming console. Microsoft is saying, if you only want a gaming console, then go for the 360 or the PS4, but what we have with the Xbox One is an entertainment unit with all this other cool shit that is going to integrate into your entertainment space very well because you're already on Windows and we have Smartglass shit and all these other Windows devices or apps enabled to integrate with you, and has features that will make a lot of entertainment things more enjoyable (side-by-side fantasy pools, smartglass, other shit), as well as being a great gaming console (atm anyways) that will continue to bring you your gaming shit that you like. Yes, you can argue that some of the features aren't exactly the greatest - the 24 hour online authentication should be 72 hours in my opinion - but the point is, the Xbox One brand has to have the Kinect things because all of these things are essential to the Xbox branding. Not as a gaming console, but as a home entertainment unit. + Show Spoiler +Also, it's pretty sad to see people using Xbone all the time - you do realize how sad you resort to name calling? Are you 5th graders? Grow up...
Before I read this post, I was going to not buy it because I don't want to spend $500 on a gaming console,.
Now I'm not going to buy it because I don't want to spend $500 on an "entertainment system."
This post really changed how I thought about the issue, thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
