On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote: I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console.
I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet.
When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games.
Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam.
Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now.
They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all.
Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards.
Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture.
Aren't both manufactured by AMD? PC games work just fine even on graphics cards by completely different companies *Gasp*
PS1 games work just fine on PS2 *Gasp*
-
Yet marketplace games work flawlessly even if they were for the past generations? Hm, interesting...
Better be some amazing architecture optimization as I said. Will be fun seeing some benchmarks.
Re-watching the presentation video, I actually call fraud. He puts his hand in his pocket every time he uses the "voice commands". It certainly looks a lot like he's using a remote controller to me. That's just ridiculous.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Consoles becoming PCs make themselves obsolete. Why pay for a system that limits me to it´s manufactures software ? But Billions of smartphone and Apple users dont care so why ask this question....
On May 22 2013 21:45 Dyme wrote: And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
that statement is only partially true imo. PCs are all different. What I always liked for online gaming on consoles: since the hardware is the same in every machine, you can't customize the graphic options to the point where one player gets an advantage (turn off foliage, FPS jumps etc.). Only thing that hinders that point is that there is no option to use mouse and keyboard on a console.
also one of the bigger factors is the prize point. Sony and MS could easily have a lot more powerful systems, but that would increase the prize significantly.
PC is better in everything, but it is also expensive.
On May 22 2013 19:00 paralleluniverse wrote: There are many complaints that Xbox One isn't focused on games like how PS4 is. But this is just lazy, completely vague and utterly substanceless fluff.
Tell me, specifically how Xbox One doesn't focus on games?
The fact that Xbox One has better multimedia features than PS4 doesn't take anything away from "focusing on games" (whatever that's suppose to mean, no one can specifically say). It's not a zero-sum game.
Some people say that Xbox One lacks features like backwards compatibility. Well, then argue that it lacks backwards compatibility, or whatever other feature it is that you don't like, and don't throw out meaningless babble like "Xbox One doesn't focus on games".
Be specific.
The problem is that the more multimedia functionality it has, the more expensive it is to manufacture, thus increasing the price. I only want a gaming console, why pay "extra" for all this stuff I don't want or need?
Rubbish. Other than the Kinect (something quite cheap to produce and might not add to the end cost at all), everything else extra you get in the XBox doesn't cost anything extra when compared to the PS4. It's software features from a software company.
That's not to say XBox will be cheaper than PS4, or that it'll be dearer. We in fact have no idea whatsoever, but I can guarantee the software features won't add (directly) to the cost of the device.
If you want to buy the cheaper of the two consoles, do so, but you have no idea which one that will be at this stage.
I was thinking definitely PS4 prior to this announcement, but the software features are a complete game changer. I was thinking PS4 because it's reportedly slightly more powerful graphics wise...but unless the gap is larger than rumoured, I'll be going XBox for certain.
P.S. Even though I'm now thinking I'll get one, the XBox One has a stupid name and looks ugly, thank god I keep my consoles inside a cabinet.
Of course the kinect will add to the end cost, it won't be created out of thin air...
Also, regarding the software features, you are right, it won't add to the manufacturing cost of the x1 hardware. But of course the costs are simply transferred onto the R&D, maintenance and extra support costs, so no, this stuff is not completely free as you make it. Anyway, even if ms did end up paying nothing for the software, nothing stops them from hyping it up as some next gen shit and giving the console a rip off price tag
Obviously not if they are idiots, but one assumes one of the largest tech companies in the world understands that you have to compete on price as well as features. Microsoft spends money on R&D like it's going out of style, but they STILL can't spend money fast enough and have billions in the bank. R&D is a SEPARATE cost for companies like MS and does NOT directly relate to their end products. They'll of course charge what they can get (because they'd be idiots not to), but they aren't going to charge MORE than they can get.
Seperate in what sense? Why are you so insistent on painting a line between direct manufacturing costs and the other costs? If MS is willing to take the hit, what difference does it make whether they take massive losses on the R&D/SoftwareDev/Infrastructure or make a loss on production? The reality is they operate on a budget (standard procedure, and no, this isn't infinity, even though they are ms) and resources have to be allocated. MS has placed emphasis on the multimedia/entertainment route in their business strategy and have allocated some resources that could have gone to other areas (e.g. gaming). I am not saying they have spent too much on entertainment or too little on gaming, I am just pointing out that believing that the non-direct costs have no bearing on the x1s budget on gaming/price is borderline crazy.
Also: "They'll of course charge what they can get (because they'd be idiots not to), but they aren't going to charge MORE than they can get"
what the hell is this supposed to mean? You are basically just reiterating the fact that if they can get away with ripping us off, then they will... It is no different in any business, take Apple, everyone knows the monstrous profit margins, doesn't mean people won't buy them though. People will see value in X1's multimedia stuff and be willing to pay more..
Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Yet marketplace games work flawlessly even if they were for the past generations? Hm, interesting...
Better be some amazing architecture optimization as I said. Will be fun seeing some benchmarks.
Re-watching the presentation video, I actually call fraud. He puts his hand in his pocket every time he uses the "voice commands". It certainly looks a lot like he's using a remote controller to me. That's just ridiculous.
You really have to look that far into it? They showed live sport games with fantasy league updates, obviously it was pre-recorded. Live demonstrations at conferences like this are always a nightmare, it only makes sense to fake it like every other company does. Get over it.
Unrelated: Microsoft is making it hard to be a fanboy these days. This reveal sucked ass.
I don't buy used games, don't share games with friends, and I've never played a single Xbox game on the Xbox 360. My house always has internet, and I'm not afraid to have an always on system. It's like Xbox One was made specifically for me :O totally getting this.
On May 22 2013 22:21 wo1fwood wrote: Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Hmm... Quite a few people are changing. More and more people are tech savvy these days.
On May 22 2013 18:07 Aerisky wrote: Yeah it's like they're trying to make smart TVs just without the TV...
Not to mention yeah, so much media is no longer consumed that way nowadays.
That is what they're trying to do, which is not such a bad idea (or at least have two modes for it.)
The primary problem with smart TVs (and even the XBox 360) is that it's a separate device and input, so you have to switch between watching TV and watching smart TV or Xbox content. With the pass through, you can keep them together which makes it much more convenient and you can do universal searches within ALL content (such as HBO Go and Netflix and and Amazon Prime and Cable TV combined) and you'll probably get a better TV guide interface than what your cable company's box provides.
So I don't mind the pass through and using the console (either console) as a smart TV. The thing is that's just a side element, the TV aspect should not be receiving that much attention. Especially in a press conference where the main viewers are the most hardcore fans, and then investors. It's not like the casual gaming fans were tuning in at 1PM on a Tuesday to watch this, it was gamers and their message should've been catered to gamers.
The fact that Xbox One has better multimedia features than PS4 doesn't take anything away from "focusing on games" (whatever that's suppose to mean, no one can specifically say). It's not a zero-sum game.
Projects and products are always a zero-sum game. This isn't that hard to understand.
On May 22 2013 18:50 Nekovivie wrote: I really dont understand why you would design it to not have backwards compatibility. Theres a lot of great 360 games that will never get played now, because not many people are going to buy a 360 who doesn't already have one. They'll buy the latest console.
I also don't understand why it doesn't have backwards compatibility, but not in the usual sense. What I really don't understand is why the concept of "backwards compatibility" isn't extinct yet.
When's the last time someone announced that a digital games platform like Steam doesn't have backwards compatibility. Never, because such a concept makes no sense in the context of computer games.
Given that a Xbox One is basically a PC with an operating system, and given that Xbox Live is essentially Steam, why don't they just sell Xbox 360 games on Xbox Live which can be downloaded on Xbox One? Then the whole notion of backward compatibility would simply cease to be, like on Steam.
Seeing as Xbox One and the 360 have different hardware it would be very difficult to just allow 360 games to be played on the new one. The games wouldn't run very well, if at all, on the new one since the code for the 360 games were written for that exact hardware, not the one they're using now.
They could simulate it through software but that is a slow and painful process, often requiring to put in code for each game instead of code that works for all.
Strangely enough older PC games work just fine on new graphics cards.
Not the same thing. The 360 and the new one are using different ways of processing things. It's not just new hardware, it's a different architecture.
Aren't both manufactured by AMD? PC games work just fine even on graphics cards by completely different companies *Gasp*
PS1 games work just fine on PS2 *Gasp*
-
Yet marketplace games work flawlessly even if they were for the past generations? Hm, interesting...
Better be some amazing architecture optimization as I said. Will be fun seeing some benchmarks.
Re-watching the presentation video, I actually call fraud. He puts his hand in his pocket every time he uses the "voice commands". It certainly looks a lot like he's using a remote controller to me. That's just ridiculous.
Its completely possible to optimize older games to work on newer systems. But even you should understand why this isn't the optimal route for every game that has ever been released. The workload required for this also varies quite a lot depending on how the game was made. Angrybirds is a game very easily optimized for any system you want to put it on. Gran Turismo is probably incapable of ever being played on another system without one of the 3 things I stated in my original post.
Here is why I am disappointed. What will Xbox One bring to my TV experience to justify losing my existing functionality only to avoid hitting the input button on my remote?
Microsoft partners with one of the worst rated customer service cable providers in the country and expects the rest of us to want to give up our superior service? I would never, EVER, pay for Comcast.
My Directv box can:
Record 4 shows at once Set up recordings from web Watch from multiple rooms
Can Xbox One do any of that? No idea, their big premier gave us zero details on any of it.
What does xbox one do: Allow me to get fantasy updates while watching sports ?? ?? ??
All microsoft had to do was show an updated 360 and I was ready to throw my money at them. How in the world they managed to make me reconsider getting the new xbox is beyond me.
The fact that Xbox One has better multimedia features than PS4 doesn't take anything away from "focusing on games" (whatever that's suppose to mean, no one can specifically say). It's not a zero-sum game.
Projects and products are always a zero-sum game. This isn't that hard to understand.
You have repeated this around 30 times in this thread I think now. Obviously its incredibly hard to understand by most.
On May 22 2013 22:21 wo1fwood wrote: Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Hmm... Quite a few people are changing. More and more people are tech savvy these days.
Oh I wouldn't deny that as a general trend that people are much more savvy with technology than they were even 5 years ago, but still, we (as in gamers or the very tech minded) tend to be at the forefront of changes and its easy to forget that not everyone is so ravenous when consuming or adopting changes. There's this whole generational thing to take into account, or lifestyle choices that play a role in this. Like, my dad still reads the newspaper. When he reads something online and wants to share or keep it, he likes to print it out instead of making a PDF or keeping an electronic copy, so he can read it (his physical relationship to it). To me that's such a waste of paper and unnecessary, but for him this is normal and what he prefers. Granted he's a bit older than most, but when you were born, where, and what you do play a lot into how quickly you adopt a new idea. Habits die hard.
Also, technology is getting easier to use, so the threshold of how easy to use something is, is much lower than it used to be.
On May 22 2013 22:21 wo1fwood wrote: Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Hmm... Quite a few people are changing. More and more people are tech savvy these days.
It doesn't look like anything meaningful since you haven't demonstrated how many people watch Netflix on their computer vs. on their TV.
The issue isn't by what provider your content arrives. It's where you watch your content. So even if a lot of people are switching to things like Netflix and HBO Go, they may still be watching in the same place. Their push it to integrate content from any provider into a single viewing source, so you can watch on your couch. That doesn't really have much to do with the traditional TV vs online TV debate.
The issue is just, I think, how much priority they've given it.
On May 22 2013 22:21 wo1fwood wrote: Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Hmm... Quite a few people are changing. More and more people are tech savvy these days.
It doesn't look like anything meaningful since you haven't demonstrated how many people watch Netflix on their computer vs. on their TV.
The issue isn't by what provider your content arrives. It's where you watch your content. So even if a lot of people are switching to things like Netflix and HBO Go, they may still be watching in the same place. Their push it to integrate content from any provider into a single viewing source, so you can watch on your couch. That doesn't really have much to do with the traditional TV vs online TV debate.
The issue is just, I think, how much priority they've given it.
Until streaming content is available at the same hour as cable/satellite TV times, I will never make the switch. I want to see things as soon as I get a chance.
On May 22 2013 22:21 wo1fwood wrote: Ok so I finished watching the event and basically, this was pretty much what I expected out of MS for the announcement.
More attention given to total integration and non-gaming features
The overall underplaying of gaming demos
Graphics are more about the little things right now so it was sort of expected to not have jaw dropping-ly gorgeous visuals, especially when to get really breakthrough visuals you'd need a powerhouse machine, which the XBOX nor the PS4 can really deliver at a reasonable price point.
Tell me specifically what gaming feature is missing.
More TV features != less gaming features.
Do americans really still watch that much TV? Here in germany TV is like radio - its basically dead. Its only used for big sport-events. I don't watch any shows/movies or news on TV anymore for like 5 years.
No. TV is worthless. But TV shows are great.
I don't have stats to back me up, but I am absolutely sure TV is still completely alive (in Germany at least). Of course I personally don't watch it, but every normal person does. When people are bored they surf the internet or watch TV. Most people still watch TV in that position.
Germany still has a bunch of purely German channels, every series, every movie dubbed in German etc.
And the xbox looks really uninteresting. Guess it's gonna take 10 more console generations until the general public realizes that PC is just like a console except better in everything.
Why would anyone watch a TV-Show on TV? Good shows like Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones I just download and watch them on my PC, like every one should. I could not watch these shows with a Adbreak and you have to pay extra to watch them (in HD), if you have a HD-TV. On PC its all free and you can watch everything when you like to and not when the schedule says so!
The only reason for me to keep my 15yo CRT-TV is to watch a little bit of Football or Formula 1 from time to time. But I can't imagine anyone under 40 would choose watching terrible TV over a PC.
Sure you can download them for 'free', but it's not legal.
Also, that is a very narrow perspective on how people as a general population operate. Not everyone is technically savvy, so it'll be a good long while before the TV as a traditional platform is "dead". As an example, it has been possible to watch TV from your computer for more than 12 years now, and we are only now getting to the point where things are just starting to integrate better.
Hmm... Quite a few people are changing. More and more people are tech savvy these days.
It doesn't look like anything meaningful since you haven't demonstrated how many people watch Netflix on their computer vs. on their TV.
The issue isn't by what provider your content arrives. It's where you watch your content. So even if a lot of people are switching to things like Netflix and HBO Go, they may still be watching in the same place. Their push it to integrate content from any provider into a single viewing source, so you can watch on your couch. That doesn't really have much to do with the traditional TV vs online TV debate.
The issue is just, I think, how much priority they've given it.
I highly doubt that it will be 'any' provider. And a lot of analysis I listened post show leads to that scenario too. it is most likely be a list of providers, that are native to US and UK. It is all speculation after all, cause there were no confirmation given at any point.
On May 22 2013 22:12 BaneKingPrime wrote: Also: "They'll of course charge what they can get (because they'd be idiots not to), but they aren't going to charge MORE than they can get"
what the hell is this supposed to mean? You are basically just reiterating the fact that if they can get away with ripping us off, then they will... It is no different in any business, take Apple, everyone knows the monstrous profit margins, doesn't mean people won't buy them though. People will see value in X1's multimedia stuff and be willing to pay more..
Pretty self explanatory: Microsoft won't rip anybody off, because then they won't sell any consoles. They'll charge a price dictated by the market. If their console is much better, then likely it'll be dearer than the PS4. If it's a little better, it'll probably be the same price. If it's worse it'll be cheaper.
So if you think it'll be dearer, you also must think it will be better?
EDIT: Also, the XBox One is looking like it'll be a good chunk cheaper to produce than the PS4, for what it's worth - although you'll likely get worse graphics or framerates (probably more likely to be worse framerates than worse graphics, because of the similarities in hardware between the two).
586
275
150
EPT
