"Xbox One" Reveal Event

[Chris2K]

I'm pretty sure this hasn't been mentioned yet, but Microsoft's stock price was down 0.66% after the announcement of their next console.

On what I'm sure is an unrelated note, Sony's stock price was up 8.25%.

[METALMAN]

It's only been mentioned about SEVENTY HUNDRED times :/

[King Ellis]

In fact the more I think of it - the more I am reminded of the news I had heard a while back about them making a version that would be sold outright and a version that would be done on a subscription basis.. and I'm starting to wonder if later on down the road there's going to be an XBox One that removes some of these restrictions. Early adapters buy no matter what, everyone with an issues buys later on down the road.. but that sounds stupid so I'm just going to leave it at that 'thinking out loud' thought.

I think that was used for a cheaper 360 but you'd have to agree to signing up for 2 years of Xbox Live at a certain rate, which is probably more expensive than you would be able to find if you found pre-paid cards elsewhere, so I'd imagine it'd be akin to that if they used it again, rather than a 'with cloud computing or without' option.

[LL!]

I'm gonna buy one just to spite Andy.

[King Ellis]

The new Xbox is so shit that Gareth Bale is buying five.

[MDK]

For 100m?

[apsham]

I think the problem most people have with the reveal, as evidenced by Apsham's latest post, is that they just don't use the features that they were talking about. Which is fine but they're not strictly gaming consoles anymore so of course a lot of the focus for next gen was going to be about expanding on its other uses. There's really only so much they can do with games so they focused on adding things that would appeal people other than just hardcore gamers.

That's not to say that there isn't anything to worry about, because there is (the game-lending and online stuff is just a mess right now) but I just think the people crying "lol TV TV TV TV TV?" need to have some perspective beyond their personal habits.

It's a game console. A game console. There is a base of people there who want it to be a game console, that is what it should be first and foremost - I haven't even really mentioned any of the television stuff, any reference I made were to the pre-existing apps which were more of a streaming thing in the first place anyways. The argument isn't in any way "stop expanding what it does" because I am fine with that for the most part. But keep the game part the way that it is. If they felt like arbitarily locking out features with some kind of junk like that - make it the expanded stuff which (gasp) you would likely need a connection of some kind for anyways.

I'd prefer my games to say "You're playing in offline mode" like they do now instead of "Log in now to play". Don't force things onto the cloud when I don't want them there and they don't have to be (SimCity, yes?).

[Summers]

But, uh, we already know it's going to be play games.

We didn't know about tv/entertainment features. We know some of that now. We also still know it'll play games.

[livid]

I think the problem most people have with the reveal, as evidenced by Apsham's latest post, is that they just don't use the features that they were talking about. Which is fine but they're not strictly gaming consoles anymore so of course a lot of the focus for next gen was going to be about expanding on its other uses. There's really only so much they can do with games so they focused on adding things that would appeal people other than just hardcore gamers.

That's not to say that there isn't anything to worry about, because there is (the game-lending and online stuff is just a mess right now) but I just think the people crying "lol TV TV TV TV TV?" need to have some perspective beyond their personal habits.

It's a game console. A game console. There is a base of people there who want it to be a game console, that is what it should be first and foremost - I haven't even really mentioned any of the television stuff, any reference I made were to the pre-existing apps which were more of a streaming thing in the first place anyways. The argument isn't in any way "stop expanding what it does" because I am fine with that for the most part. But keep the game part the way that it is. If they felt like arbitarily locking out features with some kind of junk like that - make it the expanded stuff which (gasp) you would likely need a connection of some kind for anyways.

I'd prefer my games to say "You're playing in offline mode" like they do now instead of "Log in now to play". Don't force things onto the cloud when I don't want them there and they don't have to be (SimCity, yes?).

And I just don't subscribe to the notion that it's simply a game console anymore, therefore I wasn't upset about the presentation.

Like I said, the online and game-lending stuff are valid concerns, I just don't buy into the idea that they're somehow forgetting about gamers.

[Sousa]

Do you buy into the idea that they're somehow forgetting about Dre?

[livid]

Nope. He's making it awfully hard for anybody to forget about him.

[Dan]

Yeah, it wouldn't make sense for them to talk about games for the hour with E3 right around the corner. If they did that they'd focus the E3 conference on entertainment and people would just whine about that.

They where showing off the console yesterday and what it can do, sure it was a lot of TV stuff but that's what it is.

Like Livid said, its the used game stuff and to a lesser degree the online every day stuff that bothers me.

[Colly]

They're damned either way. If they talk about games all they can really talk is 'look how good they'll look!' because all the originality and gameplay is the responsibility of the developers later, and everyone will just whinge that its just the same with better graphics.

At the end of the day its just a platform for some clever buggers to come up with some ace games, the best of which always seem to come towards the end of a consoles life cycle, and the circle begins anew.

[METALMAN]

You see, I don't care about the entertainment stuff. That's a nice addon and i certainly wouldn't complain about it.

I don't even really care about games.

It's the blatant money grabbing that affronts me. The fact that you will have to pay for the console, and then continue paying for an Xbox subscription to maintain your usage of it. That and so many other things. It's absolutely needless. Scandalous. It seems like Microsoft are trying to be like Apple by co-opting their very worst aspects.

[King Ellis]

You only need to pay for Gold to play online multiplayer.

[jase12881]

Oh we'll complain and gripe about it and how they're ruining the system. And then we'll eventually get talked into it and go out and buy it. The always on internet thing basically, for me, just means the days of taking my Xbox with me when I visit my parents, or go on vacation are over. It's not a deal-breaker for me personally as it just means the system is now as immobile as my desktop PC. It's annoying cetainly but oh well.

The thing that potentially kills it for me is the used games thing, but like the old EA online gaming thing where you had to pay $10 to play it online, Im sure it will just become something that we get used to. I think likely the decision to make this change is not so much just because they want to, but because of pressure from game developers. As a result, I would be willing to bet Sony goes the same direction. However, I do think it's to the detriment of the industry. For most of us, if we can't rent games, we're likely to play less which means we're likely to buy less. Also, if there's no way to sell games, there's a huge risk in buying them because they will have 0 value the moment the box is opened. As such, if you get a bad game, you will have wasted $60-70 depending on the price this generation. I think this will mean people take less risks and the smaller name titles will struggle to get people to play their games unless they're exceptional quality.

But I'm hypothesizing a bit I guess.

[METALMAN]

You only need to pay for Gold to play online multiplayer.

You need to go online once a day otherwise it won't work.

[Summers]

You only need to pay for Gold to play online multiplayer.

You need to go online once a day otherwise it won't work.

Nothing to confirm/deny the specifics of that. It could just mean once a day that your xbox is on, it needs to sync. So, if it's off, it doesn't need to sync.

As for forcing to pay.. that'd be free. XBL is free. XBL Gold costs.

[apsham]

If it's off then yeah - it won't have any need to sync because you're.. not using it.

[Cactus Drags]

A lot of people are reacting to stuff that's pure conjecture at the moment. MS hasn't exactly helped by skirting around certain issues, but it's far too early to be getting up in arms about anything yet.

My xbox is always connected to the net anyway so I don't see the issue.

I also don't share games. But.. the game linked to account is silly. Lovefilm and Blockbusters are going to be hit hard by that. As are Game/etc. CEX are doomed too.

My only concern regarding always-on is that I've had a history of spotty connections and random drops (although thankfully since switching to Sky it's been fine). It'd definitely be a dealbreaker for a fair few people.

EDIT: Also, Game, CEX etc. aren't doomed. 360/PS3 isn't going to disappear overnight. And they're still going to need someone to sell the new console. There'll probably be adjustments to make sure, but it's not a foregone conclusion. Hell, CEX make more money off of phones and tablets than anything else these days.

They're not neglecting their core user base at all. Did you not catch the parts about sports and Call of Duty?

There are other games than those?

This was an event designed to garner press attention. Black Ops 2 had first day sales of something like $500m. A Call of Duty title has held the top spot in the most played Xbox games for probably 90-100% of the year for something like 3, 4, 5 years. Granted they are somewhat fudged numbers because it deals only in 'unique users' and only those connected to the Xbox Live service at the time but still, Call of Duty games can sometimes go months at a time holding the top 2, 3 or 4 places. It's only in the past year or so that Minecraft has held a steady position at number 2. Other than those games, you're still looking at Halo's or FIFA's. So, yeah, if you're looking for the biggest games to launch a system, these are those games.

In general though, do people really need to be so judgmental? Within minutes people were already proudly proclaiming 'I'm not buying this' with barely anything even said about it. No one's asking you to buy it on Day 1, no one's asking you to put your deposit down for it this second. Last night we saw the status of second hand games change 3 or 4 times between 'We'll allow second hand games' and 'They've killed second hand gaming' so I just don't see what's wrong with waiting to see actual concrete information or seeing feedback when it's actually in people's homes. Maybe you can stick a fucking burlap sack over the Kinect whilst it's turned on? Who knows?

You don't need to be an early adopter of either system anyway. You can save money, get a better understanding of how it works, wait for better games to hit the market and get a better sense of how exclusives are shaping up for both systems before you go ahead and make that multiple hundred pound/dollar investment. Just look at the Wii U, it's already being sold for like £150 over here.

At E3, people always say 'Why are they showing TV and stuff? Where are the games? Why can't this be it's own separate thing?' Maybe this WAS the separate thing. Maybe in a couple of weeks you will get the haul of games you're looking for. As I was saying yesterday though, I've watched too many MS conferences to truly believe that will be the case...

Well, not quite no one

I'm pretty sure this hasn't been mentioned yet, but Microsoft's stock price was down 0.66% after the announcement of their next console.

On what I'm sure is an unrelated note, Sony's stock price was up 8.25%.

Yeah, and pretty much the same thing happened after the PS4 announcement. Nobody gives a shit about stocks any other time, it's not relevant here.

I think the problem most people have with the reveal, as evidenced by Apsham's latest post, is that they just don't use the features that they were talking about. Which is fine but they're not strictly gaming consoles anymore so of course a lot of the focus for next gen was going to be about expanding on its other uses. There's really only so much they can do with games so they focused on adding things that would appeal people other than just hardcore gamers.

That's not to say that there isn't anything to worry about, because there is (the game-lending and online stuff is just a mess right now) but I just think the people crying "lol TV TV TV TV TV?" need to have some perspective beyond their personal habits.

It's a game console. A game console. There is a base of people there who want it to be a game console, that is what it should be first and foremost - I haven't even really mentioned any of the television stuff, any reference I made were to the pre-existing apps which were more of a streaming thing in the first place anyways. The argument isn't in any way "stop expanding what it does" because I am fine with that for the most part. But keep the game part the way that it is. If they felt like arbitarily locking out features with some kind of junk like that - make it the expanded stuff which (gasp) you would likely need a connection of some kind for anyways.

I'd prefer my games to say "You're playing in offline mode" like they do now instead of "Log in now to play". Don't force things onto the cloud when I don't want them there and they don't have to be (SimCity, yes?).

Actually, Microsoft have been designing and building their product. They get to decide what it is. They could decide to sell a toaster that will only allow the person who put the bread in to eat it if they want. This sense of entitlement from a lot of people is irksome.

I'm currently underwhelmed so far, doubt I'd make use of a lot of the features enough to justify a launch day purchase. But that could change after E3. Or if the price seems reasonable. I'm not going to get worked up about stuff that isn't confirmed or is possible to change before it comes out.