"Fortunately we have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity; it’s called Xbox 360. If you have zero access to the Internet, that is an offline device."
I see what he's saying here, but there's going to be another offline device (apart possibly from certain cough EA cough publishers) called the PlayStation 4 which might be a bit more tempting to people.
"Seriously, when I read the blogs and thought about who’s really the most impacted there was a person who said, ‘Hey I’m on a nuclear sub.’ And I don’t even know what it means to be on a nuclear sub but I’ve got to imagine it’s not easy to get an internet connection. But hey, I can empathise; if I was on a sub I’d be disappointed."
Official: Microsoft don't want custom from the military.
Deleting is a pain if you or somebody in the household wants to play it again (as I've discovered as well).
I think the experiences of tens of millions of people using Steam over the last nine years shows otherwise. Since you'll be able to install from disk rather than having to download, this system should be far easier and more convenient. Since with both systems you can apparently start playing almost as soon as the install process starts, this is a non-issue.
Modern titles for PC tend to clock in at around 10 gb on average
OTOH, this is not quite accurate. 'Current' games clock in at 10-15GB on average, but that's games for this generation. Next-gen games are probably going to take up 30-40 GB (as a few outliers like MAX PAYNE 3 and BIOSHOCK INFINITE already do), if not more.
Meh, I don't see 4K TVs taking off anytime soon, if ever. To actually get any visible benefit, you'd need a f*~#ing colossal TV.
The benefits of 4K and 8K are visible at smaller sizes, certainly at normal household ones. They are MORE visible at the largest sizes, as pretty much any HD TV at over 50" starts pixellating quite noticeably at 1080, but even at the smaller sizes you should see a major improvement.
What is annoying is that they are doing this intermediate step of 4K instead of going straight to 8K. At 8K the TV image replicates the sensation of depth, so looking at an 8K TV running at 120fps is like looking out of a window rather than at a TV (the eye also loses the ability to tell what's a fake image from real life at that resolution). 4K doesn't do any of that as well. It only exists because Sony, LG and a couple of other companies wanted to introduce an intermediate format between HD and 8K, so they can get everyone to upgrade to 4K and then again to 8K later on (it is questionable if anything better than 8K will ever be necessary; it could be the standard for decades going forwards).
However, at 4K it's still possible to store images on Blu-Ray discs, so we won't need another optical format. 8K will likely be too large, and by having 4K as an intermediate step it means that by the time 8K does become standard everyone will have access to ludicrous speed-internet (as 8K content will likely be streamed or downloaded rather than bought on disc).
Welcome to PC gaming where most of the publishers are money grubbing evil men who ruin good games and heavily inconvenience legitimate customers so that the pirate crowd has to wait a few days for the cracked version of that game with no DRM included.
This is - somewhat - hyperbolic. I think Origin and UPlay fall into this category at the moment, but Steam and GoG do not. In fact, I think MS and Sony have looked exactly at how things have gone on PC and seen that as the way forwards, because so many people use those systems (Steam has 50 million individual customers, which compares well to the 70 million individual consoles that PS3 or 360 has sold).
The biggest problem is that the greatest advantage of Steam - the glorious sales - will simply not be possible on the consoles, due to the licensing fees MS and Sony will charge.
|
But they then did what they did for all the wrong reasons, not understanding Steam's popularity, or GoG's.
Steam is popular because it centralizes your game library, and you can download all those games at maximum speed provided by your ISP. Steam also has sales, a summer one and a winter one, and smaller ones in between. Which is when most of the money is earned. Plus, they listen to their customers. Also, they reward loyal customers with free keys for them and friends.
GoG is popular because they fix old titles to work on windows 7 and beyond and because their games are cheap, come DRM free and are laughably easy to install once downloaded.
Microsoft did nothing that those two services are famous for.
I was unaware of that. According to this MS XBox Exec, that's not the case.Microsoft has already confirmed that they are working on a system for providing members of the military with codes that will allow them to use their Xbox One indefinitely without requiring internet access.Just wanted to add that I have a few family members in the military that will not be getting the XB1 because of the location of their deployment. Which is unfortunate, because they're all XBox fans.
Many military members are deployed in regions that just don't have internet access.
That video gas been removed by Viacom, so I can't review what he's said. But, again, my information says otherwise. What I've heard (from last week) is that Microsoft hasn't figured out a solution yet, but they're currently exploring the idea of providing codes to the military to allow them to use the console in the absence of an internet connection.
Dear Scott,
You have always impressed me with your willingness to speak your mind, while staying relatively cool-headed under a literal internet barrage.
If that sounds like a "qualified" compliment it's because I don't want the whole website pissed at me for complimenting you. :)
I'd like to ask your advice on which console to buy. Let me tell you about myself so you can best understand my needs and interests.
My tastes are pretty eclectic. I like platformers, strategy (but more fantasy/scifi type strategy then real military stuff), and RPGs. FPS kinda spook me, but I never had a friend to play them with me. I might like them but I don't have much experience with them.
I have never played online with a console. I have played MMOs on my PC, but my experience has been pretty mixed, more negative than positive—but I still try them out, and I have had some good times with them.
So I have no PS3 or XBox 360 games in my library. As a content provider myself, I respect a company protecting itself. DRM doesn't make me angry unless it collects really unnecessary information, or it slows my PC down. Put it this way, I have never NOT purchased a game because of the DRM.
I live in a rural/suburban community with few gamers. I consider ir farm country, but I do live in an actual town. I play Pathfinder weekly via VTT. 99.5% of the community has no real idea of what a tabletop RPG is, but they all have PS3 and XBox 360's. There are a couple stores that buy, sell, trade old games and game consoles.
Money is an issue. I don't have tons of it. I would buy new games, but always assumed I could also buy old games—if even online. $400 seems okay for a new off the shelf console. I could go higher, but I cringe at $600. I used to subscribe to Netflix, but don't any longer. I wouldn't mind having it back at a low cost, if just to watch all the seasons of Dexter I missed. And maybe Mad Men, which I have never seen more than the pilot.
Finally, all of my personal friends are denouncing XBox right now and say they're switching. One or two are not, but say they're frustrated by MicroSoft's attitude. I own a pretty good PC. i7 Quad Core Processor, lots of GB Ram, and my video card is respectable.
Now that you have enough to profile me, what would you recommend?
Where'd you get your info from?
I didn't see where you posted a link to it earlier.
|
|
I'd like to ask your advice on which console to buy. Let me tell you about myself so you can best understand my needs and interests.
While I'm not Scott, if you are open to advice from others, I'd like to give you some. Personally, I'd stick with your PC, certainly in the short term. Spend the money you would have spent on a new console on games for your PC, and you'll have much better value for money. While there are some good looking games coming, a very small amount of them are exclusive to either the Xbone or the PS4, and they'll run perfectly well on any decent gaming PC.
Though, I would take another look at what games are exclusive to both consoles in late 2014, once the systems have matured a little. Things may very well have changed then and there might be some real killer exclusives out.
Dear Scott,
You have always impressed me with your willingness to speak your mind, while staying relatively cool-headed under a literal internet barrage.
If that sounds like a "qualified" compliment it's because I don't want the whole website pissed at me for complimenting you. :)
I'd like to ask your advice on which console to buy. Let me tell you about myself so you can best understand my needs and interests.
** spoiler omitted **...
Based on the last week, I'm inclined to recommend the Playstation 4 to most active gamers. Your eclectic tastes sound like they'll be better met by the PS4 than the more mainstream-targeted Xbox One.
However, there are some really killer looking Wii U games that are not out yet, but which are around the corner, and the system has a lot of gameplay potential. A lot of the most anticipated PS4 and Xbox One titles will also be available on PC. If you feel that you can satisfy your hardcore gaming need through titles that will be on the PC, the Wii U may be a really good choice because there are a lot of gameplay experiences that will be hitting that console that you will not be able to get anywhere else.
I do think that you would be the least satisfied by the Xbox One, given what you've said here.
While I'm not Scott, if you are open to advice from others, I'd like to give you some. Personally, I'd stick with your PC, certainly in the short term. Spend the money you would have spent on a new console on games for your PC, and you'll have much better value for money. While there are some good looking games coming, a very small amount of them are exclusive to either the Xbone or the PS4, and they'll run perfectly well on any decent gaming PC.
Though, I would take another look at what games are exclusive to both consoles in late 2014, once the systems have matured a little. Things may very well have changed then and there might be some real killer exclusives out.
Duly noted! And yes, any comments are welcome.
The only thing is I do miss playing in more comfortable surroundings and with a bigger screen. Although, its not THAT big of a screen. A new television has been on the list for awhile too.
Where'd you get your info from?
I didn't see where you posted a link to it earlier.
I didn't. Give me a few minutes and I'll find a source on that.
EDIT: There you go.
I do think that you would be the least satisfied by the Xbox One, given what you've said here.
Thank you for your candor!
I will consider what you've said!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only thing is I do miss playing in more comfortable surroundings and with a bigger screen. Although, its not THAT big of a screen. A new television has been on the list for awhile too.
Nowadays, you can just bring your PC into your living room and plug it into your TV. If you use Steam's Big Picture mode and a controller (like the Xbox 360 ones which are trivially compatible with PC's), the experience is very similar to the one you have with consoles. Only with much cheaper games.
TBQH I think sticking with PC gaming for the nonce might be your best bet, unless any exclusives just grab you already. It's overall cheaper, both in games and system (since you already own it) and many of the same games will be coming out for it in the next gen.
As Uzzy mentioned an HDTV can be plugged into your computer with an HDMI cable and a controller plugged in to work and it's roughly the same experience (I'm doing that as we speak actually to play some Borderlands 2) .
The only reason I'm dead set on a PS4 is because Kingdom Hearts is one of my favorites series of all time. I had bought a 360 this gen but had already decided that if KH3 came out for the PS3 I'd sell my 360 and games to buy a PS3 and that.
@Scott: I'll keep that in mind as well. If Mattrick is fired soon then we'll know which is likely correct.
Does Nintendo still kinda sanitize their games? My only child just graduated from college, so that isn't a concern.
And I never thought about hooking my computer (which is a laptop—a desktop replacement) into the TV and using Steam's Big Window Mode. I own a lot of good Steam games, and it just never occurred to me! I might be able to divert some money into a better TV instead!
I do find myself attracted to the PS4 though.
Does Nintendo still kinda sanitize their games? My only child just graduated from college, so that isn't a concern.
They tend to eschew mature content in favor of "fun", but I've found their take on it to sort of transcend generational boundaries. They're not as big on deep, context-heavy, dramatic experiences, but they're superb at pick-up-and-play, smile-on-your-face gameplay.
That's why I suggested the Wii U; if you pick up a PS4 or Xbox One there will be a lot of overlap with what your PC is capable of. There will be far less overlap with the Wii U, so in terms of sheer breadth of content I think that'll be the most bang for your buck.
But they then did what they did for all the wrong reasons, not understanding Steam's popularity, or GoG's.
Steam is popular because it centralizes your game library, and you can download all those games at maximum speed provided by your ISP. Steam also has sales, a summer one and a winter one, and smaller ones in between. Which is when most of the money is earned. Plus, they listen to their customers. Also, they reward loyal customers with free keys for them and friends.
GoG is popular because they fix old titles to work on windows 7 and beyond and because their games are cheap, come DRM free and are laughably easy to install once downloaded.
Microsoft did nothing that those two services are famous for.
Oh yeah, I completely keep blanking on the fact MS actually have their own system - Games For Windows Live - which was a complete and unmitigated disaster.
Yes, that does not fill me with hope that the XB1 system will be handled well.
That video gas been removed by Viacom, so I can't review what he's said. But, again, my information says otherwise. What I've heard (from last week) is that Microsoft hasn't figured out a solution yet, but they're currently exploring the idea of providing codes to the military to allow them to use the console in the absence of an internet connection.
Er, the link I posted has someone from Microsoft categorically saying that you will specifically not be able to use an X-Box One on a submarine because you will not have internet. That's Microsoft saying that if you're in the military and you are posted somewhere without internet, you will not be able to use the console. He also says to get round this you can 'just' get an X-Box 360 instead.
So you have Microsoft specifically saying this week that if you're in the military you will not be able to use the XB1 versus an unnamed source saying something might happen three weeks ago. I think we'll go with the Microsoft source here.
That video gas been removed by Viacom, so I can't review what he's said. But, again, my information says otherwise. What I've heard (from last week) is that Microsoft hasn't figured out a solution yet, but they're currently exploring the idea of providing codes to the military to allow them to use the console in the absence of an internet connection.I was unaware of that. According to this MS XBox Exec, that's not the case.Microsoft has already confirmed that they are working on a system for providing members of the military with codes that will allow them to use their Xbox One indefinitely without requiring internet access.Just wanted to add that I have a few family members in the military that will not be getting the XB1 because of the location of their deployment. Which is unfortunate, because they're all XBox fans.
Many military members are deployed in regions that just don't have internet access.
It's hard to find the interview, but here's a short clip of the interview.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Scott I was wrong about PS4 DRM
Further clarification on Sony's DRM policies: No more online pass
Apparently there will be less DRM on the PS4 than the PS3.
Playstation at E3: The Abridged Version (VideoGamer.com)
Lol, for someone late to the discussion that was both funny and vaguely helpful.
|
So this is how I see it...
Which will I get the better gaming enjoyment?
Many games come out for both PlayStation and the Xbox but they both have their exclusive content and in general I enjoy the exclusive content for the Xbox more then I do for the PlayStation though there are a couple of games I do enjoy on the PlayStation.
Currently I own both the Xbox 360 and the PS3. My PS3 is used for a blu-ray player and exclusive PS3 Games all other games I buy on the Xbox.
For the Next Gen systems I don't see changing what systems I will enjoy the exclusive content more. Most likely Xbox One will still come out with more games that I enjoy that will not be on the PS4. And now that the Xbox One will have a blu-ray player I have less reason to own a PS4 and their exclusive games they have are not enough for me to want the system while the Xbox One will.
So most likely this is how it will go down for me.
I will buy the Xbox One at launch, for games I know I will enjoy I will buy in digital format while games I may return to the used game market I will buy in disc format. This is assuming the statements by Microsoft is correct and there will be a used game market.
If on the other hand the publisher decide not to allow games to be sold into the used game market, which may be a possibility based on Microsoft leaving that up to the publisher, then I will not be buying those games or supporting that publisher.
The PS4 I will not be buying at launch but still will buy when I have the spending money and it is easily available. On that last part, Sony is notorious in making it difficult to get their console at launch and it generally takes 6-8 months before they are easy to find.
On the Xbox One in general.
It is obvious based on their statements and policies Microsoft wants to go away from the disk based format and to move to digital only. Though that is the future, are console gamers and the current internet tech ready for that?
I think PS4 has shown they are not and is taken full advantage of that fact by not pushing gamers away from disk based format in hopes that it will show in increase of PS4 sales and a decrease in Xbox One sales.
I think Microsoft has made a mistake in pushing players away from Disk based format by putting restrictions on them, instead they should have encouraged digital purchases not discourage Disk based format.
This could have been done this by sales on digital formats at times similar to steam and showing the convenience of the digital format vs the disk based. By going the route they have gone they have alienated the console gaming community and I think that will show in sales and unlike last Gen they will not lead the way for the next Gen.
I have 2 hopes on this,the largest being it will not hurt them enough that they will get out of the console business and the second being they will remove these restrictions in the future.
Another thing that upsets me hardware wise and something that almost convinced me not to buy an Xbox One was not adding the capability to upgrade the Hardrive. That decision, especially since they want players to buy digital makes no sense. By going all digital Hardrive space will be much more important and without the ability to upgrade to a larger hardrive makes the End of life of the system much earlier then it should be. I have thought seriously about not buying at launch and waiting a year to see if they release a new system with an upgradeable hardrive, and there is still that possibility I may.
Oh yeah, I completely keep blanking on the fact MS actually have their own system - Games For Windows Live - which was a complete and unmitigated disaster.
Hah. GfWL was horrible. I've lost track of how many times it managed to delete all my save games. (Thank you, GfWL.)
PS4 has all the benefits of disc with none of the downsides. PS4 games still install from the disc, but they do it during down time. So you can still pop in a game and play, but over-time the load speeds become faster as more and more of the game installs.
I'm the cheapest person I know and I will probably get a PS4 at launch with playstation plus.
Wrong about what?
Some of you guys need to clean your acts the hell up. If your reaction to civil disagreement is "You're wrong (as usual)," you probably don't belong in the discussion.
...
I don't think your direct (read: anecdotal) experience trumps Sony's customer data. Do you?
*chuckle* Oh, heavens, Betts. Surely you're used to it by now. As mentioned early - you have a 'history of betting on the wrong horse'. Heh. In any case, you'll live. (And you can always ignore my posts!)
I am confident that the evidence I've seen is correct, accurate, and applicable on a mass scale. And I'm also sure Sony has done research as well - and has likely come to the exact same conclusion as I have. They instead chose the cheaper solution (smaller HDD) and made it easy to upgrade so the cost of larger HDDs is borne by the consumer instead of them.
In fact, this is rather obvious.
And if you're the sort of person who needs to have instant access to their entire games library, you can go out and buy a new hard drive. I hear they're pretty inexpensive nowadays.
Indeed - just as I said in my first post. Thanks for reiterating.
Deleting is a pain if you or somebody in the household wants to play it again (as I've discovered as well).I think the experiences of tens of millions of people using Steam over the last nine years shows otherwise. Since you'll be able to install from disk rather than having to download, this system should be far easier and more convenient. Since with both systems you can apparently start playing almost as soon as the install process starts, this is a non-issue.
It does no such thing. Apparently, you haven't sat through one of the PS3's lengthy mandatory installs, nor have you tried to download a 15 GB file to the PS3. It's not quick or convenient - and I have a 32 Meg internet service. [And Steam has nothing to do with it, so I'm surprised that was even brought up.] Now, I'm sure that Sony will improve their infrastructure for the PS4, but history isn't on their side. And using blu-rays as their medium means that mandatory installs are highly likely in the PS4's future (even if launch titles may not require it) - again, just like the PS3.
If, on the PS4, you can start playing immediately while a game installs, then 500 GB might a little more palatable (well, barring 10+ GB downloaded games, which you'd get on PS+ and which would still be an issue), but I'll believe it when I see it.
Like I said - my larger HDD is already full without PS+, and it's not difficult to see that only increasing (on a much larger scale, and faster) in the future, not decreasing. In fact, it will happen, guaranteed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is correct.No, it's not.
Just because it's unconstitutional does not mean it is against the law. MS has already agreed to be fully compliant.Microsoft generally complies with government requests for information. These requests are specific, not general. They deliver certain information on individuals, not entire spheres of data on the entire country.
In fact, Microsoft, along with Google and Facebook, are actively seeking permission from the U.S. government to make public the body of requests for information they have received, so that they can demonstrate exactly how much of the information they collect is shared with the federal government.
And beyond all that, the Kinect/Xbox One does not actively store or transmit audio or video data to Microsoft of any kind (a bit of thought on upstream bandwidth constraints will tell you why), much less from the Kinect (which is not always watching, and is not constantly recording).
Stop. Fear. Mongering.
Verizon says hi?
|
I'd like to ask your advice on which console to buy. Let me tell you about myself so you can best understand my needs and interests.
I'm going to agree with Uzzy.
Alot of the game types you list are often available on the PC as well as the XBox and Playstation. Unless you have a specific game in mind, I'd suggest using your PC for it.
You can get a fantastic wired Razer 360 controller (works better than official 360 controller if you don't mind that it's wired, and you can plug it into a PC) It'll run you like $40.
If you get a game that doesn't support the controller that you want to use the controller with, or you want to be able to do macros and other neat things with the controller, like mapping things using multiple profiles or button combos to achieve an in game effect (allowing you to play games that require more buttons than the controller has, while still using the controller), buy a license for XPadder online, it's about $10-15, and includes all updates forever. XPadder will let you use the controller for any game that supports keyboard or mouse controls.
Then its just a matter of tracking down the games you want to play. Mark of the Ninja and Shank 1 & 2 are both on the PC, so far as I remember.
And last time I tried, I was able to get Epsxe to run my Playstation games on my PC from the original discs, in higher resolution with better graphics than the actual PSOne could support.
I'm also not a big fan of shooters (there are only a couple I've enjoyed). I like Western RPGs (They're better on PC), Tactical Turn Based RPGs (Often PS Exclusives), Sonic (Generally Cross Platform), Megaman (Depends, but usually Nintendo or Playstation), and 2d Capcom Fighters (And I prefer the ones with sprites to SF4 style) which generally means consoles, but it doesn't usually matter which console. I do also like Tekken though and it's usually on both consoles.
Maddox is a genius as usual
Ah, that was brilliant.
And yay Bayonetta 2!
Also, I am deeply saddened that MS apparently owns the license of Killer Instinct, looks like I'll never be playing the remake of probably my favorite fighting game ever... :(
...Maybe a fan campaign could get them to agree to port it over to Wii U eventually (doubt they'd ever let it go to PS4) if we go with the tag line, "hey Microsoft, feel like making some money from the people who are never going to buy your creepy spying console anyway? You like money, don't you?" or something. Even if it's years later, still better than never.
|
|
I love when you contradict yourself in the middle of a post.
That's because modern computers are capable of meeting the processing power requirements for accurate software emulation of that environment.
You were talking about DOS. Do you believe that the processing power required for accurate emulation of DOS is the same as the processing power required for accurate emulation of the Xbox 360 architecture? I'd love an answer to that one.
Did you read that article, ciretose? Because it's very clear that you still have no idea what you're talking about.
Scott...
Every generation has been backward compatible. The competition is backward compatible. The System is online based, so you don't need to have the hardware do anything more than identify the game...which is the same thing they have the current X-Box doing.
Having access to a backward compatible game library is a feature that would attract customers.
I know this does not seem to have been a goal for the latest XBox, but I'm not applauding them for it.
I'm simply not purchasing it.
Maddox is a genius as usual
I'm actually glad they are charging for multiplayer. I wasn't sure how Sony was maintaining servers or would be able to afford all the new servers they need and keep them running for as long as the multiplayer was played.
Maddox is a genius as usualI'm actually glad they are charging for multiplayer. I wasn't sure how Sony was maintaining servers or would be able to afford all the new servers they need and keep them running for as long as the multiplayer was played.
Ditto. I don't like online multiplayer and would be pissed if I had to subsidize it through higher console or game prices. Let the people who actually use it pay for it. I'm sure maintaining the online network and everything is not cheap.
I wonder if mandating real world IDs on Playstation multiplayer will (eventually) cut down on asshat behavior...it's a thought. Speaking of which, has anything been said regarding that?
I wonder if mandating real world IDs on Playstation multiplayer will (eventually) cut down on asshat behavior...it's a thought. Speaking of which, has anything been said regarding that?
No. I just hope I have something similar to a steam account with my PS4. Being able to re-download digital purchases would be nice. (inb4 scott; and without having draconian DRM policies)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The solution to all problems with the bone. Buy a 360. Genius.
Every generation has been backward compatible.
Are you talking only about Microsoft's consoles? Or all consoles?
If you're talking about all consoles, that is manifestly wrong.
Gamecube couldn't play SNES games which couldn't play NES games.
Dreamcast couldn't play Genesis games which couldn't play Master System games.
Backwards compatibility is the minority of most console generations and really only recent in the past 10 years as game storage methods became more stable (using DVD discs) and it was easier and cheaper to keep all the software installed on the console to run different types of programming.
It's a selling point, but mostly it's a selling point to help ease the transition from one generation to the next. For example from PS1 to PS2, I loved backwards compatibility because I was deployed, so keeping access to all my games while still only needing one console was a major plus. The next gen of games quickly pushed out the old ones though after a year.
Dreamcast couldn't play Genesis games which couldn't play Master System games.
Every generation has been backward compatible.
The Genesis could play Master system games with a really cheap adapter. I know I used one a lot. :D
But to your point, BC is not common.
The PS2 to PS1 BC was a big deal.
The 360 did have a bunch original X box games you could play.
The PS3 could do PS1 and some PS2, which they dropped support for.
The Wii could play Gamecube games (we never had a gamecube so our Wii gave us that).
So BC in one form or another was in all three of this generations consoles.
But very uncommon outside that.
I have one of the original fully backwards compatible PS3's, I still throw my PS1 disks of Final Fantasy 4, 6, 7, and Chrono Trigger in there from time to time. Also the original PS2 Tekken Tag Tournament is pretty much mine and my group of friends favorite fighting game, so we rock that on occasion too. Three generations of Playstation games on one machine is a nice thing to have, and one of my fears is when that thing eventually dies.
Scott...
Every generation has been backward compatible.
No, it hasn't. The SNES wasn't backwards compatible. The N64 wasn't backwards compatible. The Saturn wasn't backwards compatible. The Gamecube wasn't backwards compatible.
Hell, the entire third, fourth, and fifth generations of consoles lacked backwards compatibility of any kind whatsoever. I doubt the first and second had it either. It wasn't until the sixth generation (we're in the seventh right now) that backwards compatibility even played a role. It's only been a part of the console wars landscape for two generations!
The competition is backward compatible.
The Wii U is backwards compatible, but the Wii U is more of an iterative step than a generational leap anyway (and even then, calling the Wii U a direct competitor to the Xbox One and PS4 is being pretty charitable). The PS4 does not feature native backwards compatibility, and they have announced no PS3 titles that will be playable on the PS4.
The System is online based, so you don't need to have the hardware do anything more than identify the game...which is the same thing they have the current X-Box doing.
It still requires emulation. Unless your entire backwards compatibility solution is to have a massive bank of Xbox 360s in a server farm somewhere hooked up to the internet so that you can literally stream the game to the Xbox One (with the new console accepting input and displaying video only).
Having access to a backward compatible game library is a feature that would attract customers.
I don't think they care much.
And, again, have you read the article I linked to? It explains a lot about why backwards compatibility is so hard, and why console manufacturers often make the choice to go without it (hint: it's not because they only want you buying new games).
You know, I wondered how the Xbox One was going to go down in Japan. I wasn't sure if the DRM was going to go well, and Japan, if I recall, hasn't been as interested in switching over to downloads. Turns out they aren't going to bother with Japan yet, though. Only 21 countries are getting the One on launch, and you may not play games in any country out of those regions.
The countries you can play in.
Microsoft explaining that you cannot play the One in a country it has not been launched in.
I'm...stumped, honestly. I've seen some logic to some of what they've done - even if I've disagreed with it - but to cut out so many players at launch, while your competitor is launching globally, seems like business suicide. You're essentially giving Sony Japan. The Xbox was likely to have problems there anyway, but this is not going to help. At all.
|
|
You know, I wondered how the Xbox One was going to go down in Japan. I wasn't sure if the DRM was going to go well, and Japan, if I recall, hasn't been as interested in switching over to downloads. Turns out they aren't going to bother with Japan yet, though. Only 21 countries are getting the One on launch, and you may not play games in any country out of those regions.
The countries you can play in.
Microsoft explaining that you cannot play the One in a country it has not been launched in.
I'm...stumped, honestly. I've seen some logic to some of what they've done - even if I've disagreed with it - but to cut out so many players at launch, while your competitor is launching globally, seems like business suicide. You're essentially giving Sony Japan. The Xbox was likely to have problems there anyway, but this is not going to help. At all.
So I'm stationed with the Army in Korea--an XB1 I buy from Amazon or my local military exchange won't play the games bought alongside it?
Even if you can get the internet...no, it seems it will not.
So I'm stationed with the Army in Korea--an XB1 I buy from Amazon or my local military exchange won't play the games bought alongside it?
Don't worry, you can play when you get home.
Until then, buy a 360.