When you’re making a checklist of items to buy for your new start-up small business, you’ll probably have the usual office supplies, desk chairs, computers, software and so on. But Microsoft has one more item that you shouldn’t overlook, an Xbox One.
While it may seem like IRS bait to claim a video game console as a business expense, the idea isn’t as wacky as it sounds as these boxes have evolved abilities past mere gameplay. Microsoft Xbox MVP Marques Lyons wrote an entire post (via Polygon) about the potential business uses of the Xbox One, and how it’s an “entirely justifiable” business write-off for companies.
“The Xbox One, priced at $499, is an affordable option for small business owners, as there are many features built into the console that could help it rival even the most modest of video conferencing and networking platforms.”
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
because training stage is the best stage to play the game.
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
Most of the games actually run better on ps3.
Define most? because as far as im informed every game that EVO and MLG runs, preform better on an Xbox than a PS3 so much so, that alot of the dropped combo's you saw on stream was followed by a comment from the commentators of eighter "commentators curse" or "Ps3 Lag"
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
Most of the games actually run better on ps3.
I have been informed that pretty much all of Capcom's games run better on the xbox, probably because it is so much easier to develop on the xbox so they didnt do a proper port to ps3.
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
Most of the games actually run better on ps3.
I have been informed that pretty much all of Capcom's games run better on the xbox, probably because it is so much easier to develop on the xbox so they didnt do a proper port to ps3.
It's just a capcom game problem. Tekken, KoF, P4 etc etc all run fine on ps3.
Evo uses ps3 because prior to SF4 coming out they had already gotten some ps3s to run Tekken 5: DR, so it was cheaper to buy more ps3s than a whole set of 360s, and the version differences weren't found quick enough between SF4s console release (Feb 2009) and Evo having to make a choice for that summer.
Being in the crowd at evo, the booing was louder than it sounds on those videos. And it happened every time Microsoft or Xbox One was shown in videos or mentioned.
What did we learn? That unreleased AAA games like Rome 2 and Saints Row 4 didn't get discounted.
What's this got to do with Xbox One?
Well, if you remember back here and here, people were expecting Xbox One, with it's previous DRM policy, to announce discounts on it's AAA games more than 6 months in advance. They were mad and angry that Microsoft dare announce a console with DRM, but developers didn't announce cheaper games more than 6 months in advance, despite the fact that this doesn't even happened with Steam's comparatively draconian level of DRM.
On July 23 2013 22:37 paralleluniverse wrote: So the Steam Summer Sale has just come and gone.
What did we learn? That unreleased AAA games like Rome 2 and Saints Row 4 didn't get discounted.
What's this got to do with Xbox One?
Well, if you remember back here and here, people were expecting Xbox One, with it's previous DRM policy, to announce discounts on it's AAA games more than 6 months in advance. They were mad and angry that Microsoft dare announce a console with DRM, but developers didn't announce cheaper games more than 6 months in advance, despite the fact that this doesn't even happened with Steam's comparatively draconian level of DRM.
Delusional thinking.
There's a difference between "discount" for games that haven't been released yet, and simply a lower price out the gate. When you buy a console with drm, you expect the prices to be lower altogheter. Else there's nothing for us to gain. This isn't something we expect a month or two or half a year after release. If the prices was going to be lower, we'd know about it now.
Also, no one in their right mind actually thought the xbox game prices, even with their previous drm policies, was actually going to be cheaper. We saw through that bullshit right away.
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
Most likely because they get sponsored to do so. Or maybe they just want good hardware.
On July 17 2013 01:34 woody60707 wrote: On that note. why does Evo and MLG use PS3 and not xbox? The install base have to be much larger with the xbox.
Most likely because they get sponsored to do so. Or maybe they just want good hardware.
Sponsorship and atleast for EVO the consoles were bought way early in the cycle and now they just have them and are used to running with ps3's.
Evo esp this is sub optimal, capcom games Street fighter and Marvel vs Capcom both are known to he slowdowns in the ps3 version that are not there in the 360 version. That is outside of the normal small frame to frame differences between the game like the input buffer and frame buffer is a full frame longer then the 360 version of the game plays slower plus there are chances of slowdown occurring.
This is due to PS3 using the ugly as dicks libGCM made by sony which is not really openGL ps3t can an openGL emulation layer but it's shit. Xbox360 uses a custom directX sorta DX10 ish the Xbox1 will use same as windows DirectX 11.2 which will be exactly the same as the Dx found on Windows 8.1 and above.
If it's legitimate, I think most of my claims so far have been completely correct lol
From the first article:
That processing power enables things like instantaneous Kinect, where voice commands immediately activate tasks on the Xbox, from waking up the machine instantly to changing the channel on your TV. That kind of processing exists alongside other things going on at the same time. You can, for instance, watch TV and then receive a Skype call without turning off the TV show. To do this type of thing, Microsoft had to design the box in a way that it could access memory and caches of data much faster than in past game consoles.
First off: I agree that the whole concept is awesome and if they manage to pull it off, it will be amazing. The only way to even have a hope of pulling it off is by designing the hardware in such a way that it can. However, this little bit is really really misleading. There is absolutely no way voice recognition software can run instantaneously if it has to send the audio to a datacenter, which processes it and sends the result back to your XB1.
I have no clue what they're on about with their Skype call stuff, because my PC has been able to multitask this kind of stuff seamlessly since what seems like forever, which indicates that what they are selling as fancy newtech is basically the same architecture that has always existed in PCs. The fact that cellphones and tablets cannot do this is a design CHOICE, not a hardware limitation: it has to do with battery power and using the available hardware smartly, but there's no hardware limitation, just as there isn't when your PC is playing a movie or a stream and you get a skype call. Hell, even the sound is processed together, making a hell of a mess of things.
So that's just one paragraph. The rest of the text reads a lot like the way I write my project reports about things that I haven't actually built yet, but want to build. It is all awesome, until in reality it turns out that if you live in Hickville, Oklahoma (not to mention anywhere in Brazil, which is also a tier 1 country in their fancy map), the internet isn't fast enough to do any of that. The resolution of the Kinect is great, but realtime expression recognition software is both terrible and extremely computationally intensive. The rendering of graphics in a cloud and synching that up with locally computed graphics is going to be an absolute nightmare for engine developers (not to mention, impossible for any multiplatform games). And a lot more of such things that make it seem like this is all really awesome, but completely unrealistic, when you read between the lines of the technobabble.
On July 23 2013 22:37 paralleluniverse wrote: So the Steam Summer Sale has just come and gone.
What did we learn? That unreleased AAA games like Rome 2 and Saints Row 4 didn't get discounted.
What's this got to do with Xbox One?
Well, if you remember back here and here, people were expecting Xbox One, with it's previous DRM policy, to announce discounts on it's AAA games more than 6 months in advance. They were mad and angry that Microsoft dare announce a console with DRM, but developers didn't announce cheaper games more than 6 months in advance, despite the fact that this doesn't even happened with Steam's comparatively draconian level of DRM.
Delusional thinking.
What's your point? No, AAA games do not go on sale until after release, but did Xbox ONE announce anything comparative to a Steam Sale, where you could pick up 1-2 year old AAA games for 75% off, or really good indie titles for under $5? No?
As far as I can tell, outside of multiplayer content, cheap games and digital downloads are the only two ways DRM can be viable to a consumer. Digital downloads for a console is almost laughable unless you have ridiculous bandwidth and storage on the device, and there was no indication that players would be saving a significant amount of money on games through sales like Steam. So how exactly is Steam's version of DRM draconian by comparison?
The first version of the XBONE would have been fine, and would have gone over well with the public, if the DRM was only for digitally downloaded games. Play offline, without checks and DRM with your disc games, require checks for digital games. Provide sales on AAA and indie titles somewhat frequently through digital downloads, because people are willing to give up a little bit of freedom with their games for a killer deal.
You're right, it is delusional thinking to expect Microsoft to discount AAA games upon release, but I'm not sure how that's a point in their favor.
That processing power enables things like instantaneous Kinect, where voice commands immediately activate tasks on the Xbox, from waking up the machine instantly to changing the channel on your TV. That kind of processing exists alongside other things going on at the same time. You can, for instance, watch TV and then receive a Skype call without turning off the TV show. To do this type of thing, Microsoft had to design the box in a way that it could access memory and caches of data much faster than in past game consoles.
First off: I agree that the whole concept is awesome and if they manage to pull it off, it will be amazing. The only way to even have a hope of pulling it off is by designing the hardware in such a way that it can. However, this little bit is really really misleading. There is absolutely no way voice recognition software can run instantaneously if it has to send the audio to a datacenter, which processes it and sends the result back to your XB1.
I have no clue what they're on about with their Skype call stuff, because my PC has been able to multitask this kind of stuff seamlessly since what seems like forever, which indicates that what they are selling as fancy newtech is basically the same architecture that has always existed in PCs. The fact that cellphones and tablets cannot do this is a design CHOICE, not a hardware limitation: it has to do with battery power and using the available hardware smartly, but there's no hardware limitation, just as there isn't when your PC is playing a movie or a stream and you get a skype call. Hell, even the sound is processed together, making a hell of a mess of things.
So that's just one paragraph. The rest of the text reads a lot like the way I write my project reports about things that I haven't actually built yet, but want to build. It is all awesome, until in reality it turns out that if you live in Hickville, Oklahoma (not to mention anywhere in Brazil, which is also a tier 1 country in their fancy map), the internet isn't fast enough to do any of that. The resolution of the Kinect is great, but realtime expression recognition software is both terrible and extremely computationally intensive. The rendering of graphics in a cloud and synching that up with locally computed graphics is going to be an absolute nightmare for engine developers (not to mention, impossible for any multiplatform games). And a lot more of such things that make it seem like this is all really awesome, but completely unrealistic, when you read between the lines of the technobabble.
Well really, my point is, these are people who are actually working on it versus ... your opinion/knowledge about it being unrealistic.
Like, am I supposed to listen to you telling me it's not going to work, when clearly every single one of them have gone like, "yeah this cloud bsns is going to work at least somewhat well." I get that you guys are dubious of it working, but really I don't get why I would listen to your opinion about it being not doable when you're not actual engineers working on that technology, while they are. I'm an engineer too and it's not like I don't think that it's seriously hard to do, but I don't get why the assumption is that they're lying to us.
If it's legitimate, I think most of my claims so far have been completely correct lol
From the first article:
That processing power enables things like instantaneous Kinect, where voice commands immediately activate tasks on the Xbox, from waking up the machine instantly to changing the channel on your TV. That kind of processing exists alongside other things going on at the same time. You can, for instance, watch TV and then receive a Skype call without turning off the TV show. To do this type of thing, Microsoft had to design the box in a way that it could access memory and caches of data much faster than in past game consoles.
First off: I agree that the whole concept is awesome and if they manage to pull it off, it will be amazing. The only way to even have a hope of pulling it off is by designing the hardware in such a way that it can. However, this little bit is really really misleading. There is absolutely no way voice recognition software can run instantaneously if it has to send the audio to a datacenter, which processes it and sends the result back to your XB1.
I have no clue what they're on about with their Skype call stuff, because my PC has been able to multitask this kind of stuff seamlessly since what seems like forever, which indicates that what they are selling as fancy newtech is basically the same architecture that has always existed in PCs. The fact that cellphones and tablets cannot do this is a design CHOICE, not a hardware limitation: it has to do with battery power and using the available hardware smartly, but there's no hardware limitation, just as there isn't when your PC is playing a movie or a stream and you get a skype call. Hell, even the sound is processed together, making a hell of a mess of things.
So that's just one paragraph. The rest of the text reads a lot like the way I write my project reports about things that I haven't actually built yet, but want to build. It is all awesome, until in reality it turns out that if you live in Hickville, Oklahoma (not to mention anywhere in Brazil, which is also a tier 1 country in their fancy map), the internet isn't fast enough to do any of that. The resolution of the Kinect is great, but realtime expression recognition software is both terrible and extremely computationally intensive. The rendering of graphics in a cloud and synching that up with locally computed graphics is going to be an absolute nightmare for engine developers (not to mention, impossible for any multiplatform games). And a lot more of such things that make it seem like this is all really awesome, but completely unrealistic, when you read between the lines of the technobabble.
Well really, my point is, these are people who are actually working on it versus ... your opinion/knowledge about it being unrealistic.
Like, am I supposed to listen to you telling me it's not going to work, when clearly every single one of them have gone like, "yeah this cloud bsns is going to work at least somewhat well." I get that you guys are dubious of it working, but really I don't get why I would listen to your opinion about it being not doable when you're not actual engineers working on that technology, while they are. I'm an engineer too and it's not like I don't think that it's seriously hard to do, but I don't get why the assumption is that they're lying to us.
Because no (gaming) company has ever promised the world and delivered far, far less before. A healthy amount of skepticism is warranted here. If they can deliver, wonderful. Until then, who gives a fuck? It's all unproven and the onus is on them to show results rather than promise them with the usual hyperbole.
E: To be clear, if it actually works, it's great for the system and its longevity. I hope it does. But I expect it wont.
On July 23 2013 22:37 paralleluniverse wrote: So the Steam Summer Sale has just come and gone.
What did we learn? That unreleased AAA games like Rome 2 and Saints Row 4 didn't get discounted.
What's this got to do with Xbox One?
Well, if you remember back here and here, people were expecting Xbox One, with it's previous DRM policy, to announce discounts on it's AAA games more than 6 months in advance. They were mad and angry that Microsoft dare announce a console with DRM, but developers didn't announce cheaper games more than 6 months in advance, despite the fact that this doesn't even happened with Steam's comparatively draconian level of DRM.
If it's legitimate, I think most of my claims so far have been completely correct lol
From the first article:
That processing power enables things like instantaneous Kinect, where voice commands immediately activate tasks on the Xbox, from waking up the machine instantly to changing the channel on your TV. That kind of processing exists alongside other things going on at the same time. You can, for instance, watch TV and then receive a Skype call without turning off the TV show. To do this type of thing, Microsoft had to design the box in a way that it could access memory and caches of data much faster than in past game consoles.
First off: I agree that the whole concept is awesome and if they manage to pull it off, it will be amazing. The only way to even have a hope of pulling it off is by designing the hardware in such a way that it can. However, this little bit is really really misleading. There is absolutely no way voice recognition software can run instantaneously if it has to send the audio to a datacenter, which processes it and sends the result back to your XB1.
I have no clue what they're on about with their Skype call stuff, because my PC has been able to multitask this kind of stuff seamlessly since what seems like forever, which indicates that what they are selling as fancy newtech is basically the same architecture that has always existed in PCs. The fact that cellphones and tablets cannot do this is a design CHOICE, not a hardware limitation: it has to do with battery power and using the available hardware smartly, but there's no hardware limitation, just as there isn't when your PC is playing a movie or a stream and you get a skype call. Hell, even the sound is processed together, making a hell of a mess of things.
So that's just one paragraph. The rest of the text reads a lot like the way I write my project reports about things that I haven't actually built yet, but want to build. It is all awesome, until in reality it turns out that if you live in Hickville, Oklahoma (not to mention anywhere in Brazil, which is also a tier 1 country in their fancy map), the internet isn't fast enough to do any of that. The resolution of the Kinect is great, but realtime expression recognition software is both terrible and extremely computationally intensive. The rendering of graphics in a cloud and synching that up with locally computed graphics is going to be an absolute nightmare for engine developers (not to mention, impossible for any multiplatform games). And a lot more of such things that make it seem like this is all really awesome, but completely unrealistic, when you read between the lines of the technobabble.
Well really, my point is, these are people who are actually working on it versus ... your opinion/knowledge about it being unrealistic.
Like, am I supposed to listen to you telling me it's not going to work, when clearly every single one of them have gone like, "yeah this cloud bsns is going to work at least somewhat well." I get that you guys are dubious of it working, but really I don't get why I would listen to your opinion about it being not doable when you're not actual engineers working on that technology, while they are. I'm an engineer too and it's not like I don't think that it's seriously hard to do, but I don't get why the assumption is that they're lying to us.
Because no (gaming) company has ever promised the world and delivered far, far less before. A healthy amount of skepticism is warranted here. If they can deliver, wonderful. Until then, who gives a fuck? It's all unproven and the onus is on them to show results rather than promise them with the usual hyperbole.
E: To be clear, if it actually works, it's great for the system and its longevity. I hope it does. But I expect it wont.
Yeah, but the difference was that the tone in this thread isn't indifferent to the results until the results came out, it was a healthy dose of "nope this cloud shit ain't true fuck you microsoft for lying to me" instead of the more pleasant "i really don't see how this is possible but let's see if it's true". My point isn't that you're not correct in being skeptical. It's that the tone was never skepticism in the first place.
I just went to a random page.
On June 11 2013 04:29 Womwomwom wrote: They are lying that it will improve graphics directly. They aren't lying that things like AI can improve.
Also: if you want to source technology, pick your sources better. Eurogamer's Digital Foundry actually does a lot of good work on technical analysis of hardware and console games. We're talking about esoteric bullshit. Am I going to listen to Digital Spy? No, I'm not because they're literally a wank rag that deals with entertainment news.
EPT
