| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I... I... I don't have an emoticon. How do I do an agape mouth at this?!Somebody try to defend this potential addition. I dare you.
D= )
|
Xbox One won't support current headsets.
And gaming headsets can be expensive.
Steam's check in time in offline mode is around two weeks ( http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/828937979095845728/ ).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Somebody try to defend this potential addition. I dare you.
...I seriously laughed for a solid minute after reading this. That'll make for a nice stealth update one day. Although I seriously doubt they'll disable the content, just charge the active Live account per extra user. And this is only if the filing wasn't more of a "wow that's a hilariously awful idea, let's file it before anyone else tries it".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't even think of this before, but when I was in the navy we loved pulling out the console and playing games. I'd go to other sections of the ship and have little tournaments with people. Because of security reasons, you can't hook up non-military equipment to the ship's network. The XBone would be useless during a deployment if it requires an update every 24 hours.
I know it's a small segment of the population, but it's a segment completely full of employed 18-24 y/o's.
Why does Microsoft hate the troops?
I seriously doubt it will be used to charge a per user fee for normal game usage. They probably just want to keep a control over the technology or they have a specific use for it for some future application in mind.
Off topic: Mr. Betts, didn't you work for the Democratic Party in Washington for a semester or something? I'd think that qualifies as a shill for one of the groups your accused of shilling for... What else are you hiding sir!? /joke
Again, your theory doesn't hold up. I am fully aware and capable of internet piracy (and sea piracy as well!). Why then do I CHOOSE to pay Paizo for their products that I could get for free? Do you have an explanation for why I am such an anomaly to the human condition?
You are a morally upright individual. That's wonderful for you. Unless you can state, with authority, that everyone operates along those lines, your theory doesn't hold up.
What I'm highlighting are two descriptive traits:
1) Is not opposed to illegally downloading or sharing content if they know they won't get caught.
2) Is not comfortable enough with the internet or tech in general to feel assured that they can illegally download or share content without suffering negative consequences.
Every person for whom both of those descriptors holds true is someone for whom DRM can be very effective in dissuading.
Thieves get around DRM.
Which means the people most likely to be inconvenienced by DRM are legitimate customers.
This is roughly as persuasive as, "Criminals don't care about laws, therefore gun control laws are ineffectual."
Which is to say: it's not persuasive at all.
I mean, also, blaming people because of where they live? That's also really harsh. It also kind of sounds like I'm "at fault" for living in a place that I can afford and otherwise really enjoy because of the other nice aspects such as good people and pleasant views. :/
I'm not trying to be insensitive for its own sake here, but there really are places out there with affordable living conditions, good people, good views, and reliable broadband access.
I'm not blaming people because of where they live (they're not at fault for anything, so blame doesn't enter into it). But I am saying that if you choose to live somewhere with unreliable or non-existent access to one of the most critical pieces of modern infrastructure, you shouldn't be surprised or offended when you find yourself being unable to participate in certain aspects of modern life because of it.
There are a lot of folks out there without reliable internet access for plenty of very valid reasons - whether due to money, location, profession, etc. Being poor doesn't mean your opinion shouldn't count. Not living in the US doesn't mean your opinion doesn't count. Working in the military or in a job that requires regular travel doesn't mean your opinion shouldn't count.
I'm not calling anyone a worthless human being, or anything. I'm saying that we're talking about a piece of high-tech, modern digital hardware. Making internet access central to the use of modern digital hardware is par for the course, and has been for a few years, now.
It's like someone living in Kansas complaining that a surfboard company isn't making a surfboard they can use in their backyard.
Also, being poor? We're talking about people who are considering hopping on board a $500 console release. If they don't have the financial resources to afford even basic broadband internet access, they should probably reconsider dropping half a grand on a piece of high-tech hardware.
Off topic: Mr. Betts, didn't you work for the Democratic Party in Washington for a semester or something? I'd think that qualifies as a shill for one of the groups your accused of shilling for... What else are you hiding sir!? /joke
I worked for a non-profit (501(c)(4), technically) that did training for people who worked for Democratic campaigns. I did work on the Obama campaign in 2007-08, though, as a field organizer. Regardless, I was never paid, so still not a shill.
Also, being poor? We're talking about people who are considering hopping on board a $500 console release. If they don't have the financial resources to afford even basic broadband internet access, they should probably reconsider dropping half a grand on a piece of high-tech hardware.It is worth noting that there are people for whom $500 for a console and $60 x many for games is affordable, but the cost of broadband to their location is not.
Now granted I would not describe them as poor or common, but they most certainly exist.
Granted. And, again, I think that Microsoft is okay with focusing on broadband internet access, because they consider it close enough to ubiquitous for their target audience that the increase in flexibility that a broadband expectation provides is worth losing out on the corner cases. (Especially since they haven't reached much of that audience already - rather than focusing their effort on capturing the corner cases, they can focus on increasing their market penetration among their core audience.)
How does forcing connection INCREASE market penetration?
I can see it not DIMINISHING penetration, but increasing it? Who actually wants to be forced into being online and having the option taken away from them to play offline if they wish?
And wants it enough that they would buy a console they wouldn't otherwise?
Did you know, you only need to add "?ref=fb" to the base of any NYT article and you completely circumvent their pay wall?
I do now!
Down with the New York Times!
How does forcing connection INCREASE market penetration?
I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that they're simply not invested in trying to appeal to those corner cases, because they don't need them to increase their install base.
|
|
How does forcing connection INCREASE market penetration?I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that they're simply not invested in trying to appeal to those corner cases, because they don't need them to increase their install base.
Which contradicts your statement that they are trying to expand into the less tech savvy market.
They are making the classic mistake of entrenching when they should be attacking.
Microsoft is McClellaning it up!
Which contradicts your statement that they are trying to expand into the less tech savvy market.
No, it doesn't.
They are making the classic mistake of entrenching when they should be attacking.
They are "attacking".
|
|
Ignoring the rest of your post because we've been over that already in the rest of the thread.
A bit rude, but, OK.
As to internet connections and connection speeds and bandwidth: if you can't utilize a machine that relies on an internet connection, don't buy one.
It's always a solid business maneuver to tell people "Don't buy my stuff". That's how you rake in the dough, eh? Whatever small fraction it might be (and I'm not convinced it's a small fraction that has spotty internet service) that's still potential business you've lost if all of said consumers are smart enough to not buy your product. All for a fairly minimal gain, I might add.
And when the not-used-for-years optical drive of my old laptop was removed in newer models, no-one bought the new laptops...wait, let me google that...oh, it looks like lots of people bought the new laptops.
Also, I don't work for Microsoft.
If Xbox One is essentially an Internet gaming machine requiring a connection, then that's what it is--you don't market a mobile and worry too much about complaints that it can't be plugged into a landline port when you have poor connectivity.*
It's always a solid business maneuver to tell people "Don't buy my stuff". That's how you rake in the dough, eh? Whatever small fraction it might be (and I'm not convinced it's a small fraction that has spotty internet service) that's still potential business you've lost if all of said consumers are smart enough to not buy your product. All for a fairly minimal gain, I might add.And when the not-used-for-years optical drive of my old laptop was removed in newer models, no-one bought the new laptops...wait, let me google that...oh, it looks like lots of people bought the new laptops.
Also, I don't work for Microsoft.
Ah. "Not used for years." Always a sound way of comparing actual bits of tech in individual pieces of hardware and an entire local infrastructure.
Oh, hey, I planned on making a post earlier, but I couldn't because my internet went out for a while. Fortunately it came back. Here I was worried that it'd be spotty for a few days, like last week.
But, you know, I "choose to live somewhere with unreliable or non-existent access to one of the most critical pieces of modern infrastructure," thus I "shouldn't be surprised or offended when you find yourself being unable to participate in certain aspects of modern life because of it". So, you know: my fault, really, that the local internet infrastructure, that I had no way of knowing anything about before I moved here, isn't strong enough for a corporate's own particular vision of who should be able to purchase and use their products.
I mean, it's not like I'd strongly prefer a solid internet connection or anything. Nope, I'm totally the one at fault here.
EDIT:
If Xbox One is essentially an Internet gaming machine requiring a connection, then that's what it is--you don't market a mobile and worry too much about complaints that it can't be plugged into a landline port when you have poor connectivity.*
Okay, see here? This is part of the disconnect. Many console-owners aren't, as a whole, looking for an "Internet Gaming Machine" specifically, so much as a "Gaming Machine" that also happens to come with internet.
It's like creating a mobile phone, and selling it only on the fact that it takes pictures, never-mind the fact that it makes you jump through uncomfortable hoops to try to call someone. And heaven forbid someone else make a phone call.
They seem to be trying to sell a machine many seem to be not looking for with features few seem to like.
|
|
It's always a solid business maneuver to tell people "Don't buy my stuff". That's how you rake in the dough, eh? Whatever small fraction it might be (and I'm not convinced it's a small fraction that has spotty internet service) that's still potential business you've lost if all of said consumers are smart enough to not buy your product. All for a fairly minimal gain, I might add.
And when the not-used-for-years optical drive of my old laptop was removed in newer models, no-one bought the new laptops...wait, let me google that...oh, it looks like lots of people bought the new laptops.
Also, I don't work for Microsoft.
Ah. "Not used for years." Always a sound way of comparing actual bits of tech in individual pieces of hardware and an entire local infrastructure.
Oh, hey, I planned on making a post earlier, but I couldn't because my internet went out for a while. Fortunately it came back. Here I was worried that it'd be spotty for a few days, like last week.
But, you know, I "choose to live somewhere with unreliable or non-existent access to one of the most critical pieces of modern infrastructure," thus I "shouldn't be surprised or offended when you find yourself being unable to participate in certain aspects of modern life because of it". So, you know: my fault, really, that the local internet infrastructure, that I had no way of knowing anything about before I moved here, isn't strong enough for a corporate's own particular vision of who should be able to purchase and use their products.
I mean, it's not like I'd strongly prefer a solid internet connection or anything. Nope, I'm totally the one at fault here.
I'm from Alaska. I live in Fairbanks now, and I pay $95 for 10Mbps that clocks in at around 4.5.
I only had satellite connections when I lived in Tok, and for about four hours a day when the horizon was low enough to grab a signal. We just began getting Sirius service and until a couple years ago vehicles weren't even sold with Navigation systems because they didn't work up here.
Info here. Not always online. Have to pay a fee for used games.
The fee bugs me.
The spyware bugs me.
The video camera has to be plugged in and the information can be recorded and sold.
Not for research purposed though. THAT'S illegal.
Oh, hey, I planned on making a post earlier, but I couldn't because my internet went out for a while. Fortunately it came back. Here I was worried that it'd be spotty for a few days, like last week.
It can't have been that bad. You have multiple posts from Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of last week. I think it's probably safe to say you wouldn't have suffered an interruption of usability if you had owned an Xbox One.
But that aside, you're not at fault (as I've already explained, there has been no harm done, so blame doesn't enter into it). It's just the way things are. If the situation you are in is unacceptable to you, you can work to find a way around it. If not, the PS4 sounds like a great option for you, personally.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Info here. Not always online. Have to pay a fee for used games.
The fee bugs me.
The spyware bugs me.
The video camera has to be plugged in and the information can be recorded and sold.
Not for research purposed though. THAT'S illegal.
Might I suggest a high-tech solution I'm in the process of patenting - tentatively titled Put-A-Towel-Over-The-Kinect.
In a nutshell, it involves putting a towel over the Kinect.
A bit rude, but, OK.
Not really. It's like when you walk into the middle of any debate, you can't expect the people debating to rehash the entire argument just for you when your points are the same.
And when the not-used-for-years optical drive of my old laptop was removed in newer models, no-one bought the new laptops...wait, let me google that...oh, it looks like lots of people bought the new laptops.
I'm not sure what this has to do with anything I said.
Removal of a (not used, especially) feature is not the same as adding an (unnecessary) new feature that is more restrictive than it needs to be.
Also, I don't work for Microsoft.
I never said you did.
If Xbox One is essentially an Internet gaming machine requiring a connection
And my point this whole time has been: What point is there to making the Xbox an internet gaming machine?
It basically makes it a gaming PC...but with worse hardware, more expensive games, a required internet connection, and none of the other benefits a PC offers.
The main advantages of a gaming console are the ability to pop in games and play them within minutes of the disk arriving at your home, the ability to always be able to play offline, and a generally cheaper price (depending), and exclusive titles. The Xbox One nullifies half of these advantages for no appreciable gain.
Why?
Might I suggest a high-tech solution I'm in the process of patenting - tentatively titled Put-A-Towel-Over-The-Kinect.
In a nutshell, it involves putting a towel over the Kinect.
1.) The fact that ther eneeds to be a solution implies there's a problem. I'm glad we agree on something.
2.) Doesn't the Kinect need to be able to "see" the person in the room in order to be used?
3.) That doesn't fix the fact that the MICROPHONE is always on.
It basically makes it a gaming PC...but with worse hardware, more expensive games, a required internet connection, and none of the other benefits a PC offers.
This is important: do you really believe that there is no substantive advantage that a permanently-connected console offers over a gaming PC?
The answer will be instructive.
Info here. Not always online. Have to pay a fee for used games.
The fee bugs me.
The spyware bugs me.
The video camera has to be plugged in and the information can be recorded and sold.
Not for research purposed though. THAT'S illegal.
Might I suggest a high-tech solution I'm in the process of patenting - tentatively titled Put-A-Towel-Over-The-Kinect.
In a nutshell, it involves putting a towel over the Kinect.
Cause the towel would look nice...and totally blocks sound recording.
Or I could just have a PS4 and do without the towel.
It basically makes it a gaming PC...but with worse hardware, more expensive games, a required internet connection, and none of the other benefits a PC offers.This is important: do you really believe that there is no substantive advantage that a permanently-connected console offers over a gaming PC?
The answer will be instructive.
Yes. It has defeated the purpose of a console.
Consoles do everything worse already, but have convenience and exclusives on their side.
But now they've lost convenience as an advantage.
Cause the towel would look nice...and totally blocks sound recording.Info here. Not always online. Have to pay a fee for used games.
The fee bugs me.
The spyware bugs me.
The video camera has to be plugged in and the information can be recorded and sold.
Not for research purposed though. THAT'S illegal.
Might I suggest a high-tech solution I'm in the process of patenting - tentatively titled Put-A-Towel-Over-The-Kinect.
In a nutshell, it involves putting a towel over the Kinect.
The towel was a joke. A piece of black duct tape would work fine.
Or you could buy a PS4. I'm sure you'd be happy with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It basically makes it a gaming PC...but with worse hardware, more expensive games, a required internet connection, and none of the other benefits a PC offers.This is important: do you really believe that there is no substantive advantage that a permanently-connected console offers over a gaming PC?
The answer will be instructive.
Yes. It has defeated the purpose of a console.
Consoles do everything worse already, but have convenience and exclusives on their side.
But now they've lost convenience as an advantage.
Then I'm sure no one will buy them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then I'm sure no one will buy them.
Unfortunately, the majority of people aren't very smart.
So they will buy it.
And then their competitor(s) will say "Ooh, free money!" and implement the same practices because gouging morons from all directions is better than doing it from just one.
And that's why I'm pissed off.
Off topic: Mr. Betts, didn't you work for the Democratic Party in Washington for a semester or something? I'd think that qualifies as a shill for one of the groups your accused of shilling for... What else are you hiding sir!? /jokeI worked for a non-profit (501(c)(4), technically) that did training for people who worked for Democratic campaigns. I did work on the Obama campaign in 2007-08, though, as a field organizer. Regardless, I was never paid, so still not a shill.
All joking aside and despite our political differences that was probably very interesting work.
|
|
A bit rude, but, OK.
Not really. It's like when you walk into the middle of any debate, you can't expect the people debating to rehash the entire argument just for you when your points are the same.
Ah, I see. It's obvious you're not trying to be rude, but it sounded rude in my internet-ears at the time (the disadvantage of messageboards). I have to remind myself to try and at least scan the posts before I post, myself--at least this site doesn't have Mods who break in and delete posts that repeat statements or ask same-similar questions.
And when the not-used-for-years optical drive of my old laptop was removed in newer models, no-one bought the new laptops...wait, let me google that...oh, it looks like lots of people bought the new laptops.
I'm not sure what this has to do with anything I said.
I was comparing the removal of optical disc readers from laptops (and now many desktops) to the broadband/internet requirement (which I think I misunderstood--seems Xbox One doesn't require a constant connection) for Xbox One or similar machines. I was equating the minor (now mostly forgotten) furor over the former to this upset over the latter. Not a very good comparison in retrospect.
Removal of a (not used, especially) feature is not the same as adding an (unnecessary) new feature that is more restrictive than it needs to be.
Also, I don't work for Microsoft.
I never said you did.[
Just clarifying the situation.
If Xbox One is essentially an Internet gaming machine requiring a connection...
And my point this whole time has been: What point is there to making the Xbox an internet gaming machine?
It basically makes it a gaming PC...but with worse hardware, more expensive games, a required internet connection, and none of the other benefits a PC offers.
The main advantages of a gaming console are the ability to pop in games and play them within minutes of the disk arriving at your home, the ability to always be able to play offline, and a generally cheaper price (depending), and exclusive titles. The Xbox One nullifies half of these advantages for no appreciable gain.
I agree; and the same argument can be made for owning a console at all vs simply owning a PC and faming on that. I think I've simply had enough of the Kool-Aid, though.
I just read on Facebook via Gamespot's page that Microsoft has stated that there will be a secondhand game market and to wait for further announcements whatever that means. As I said earlier, I'm out over the Kinect for some fairly specific to me reasons, but it should be interesting to follow.
Might I suggest a high-tech solution I'm in the process of patenting - tentatively titled Put-A-Towel-Over-The-Kinect.In a nutshell, it involves putting a towel over the Kinect.
I LOL'd so hard when I read that thank you!
Because I could never write better than David Wong of Cracked
The Youtube video at the end of that article ("Xbox One Reveal 2013 Highlights") had me in tears.
The last video is simply perfect. The fact that there will be a demographic watching the video thinking--
"Kinda repetitive...ooooh, things I like! Wait...I feel like I'm being mocked...downvote!!!!"
--gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling deep down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, hey, I planned on making a post earlier, but I couldn't because my internet went out for a while. Fortunately it came back. Here I was worried that it'd be spotty for a few days, like last week.It can't have been that bad. You have multiple posts from Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of last week. I think it's probably safe to say you wouldn't have suffered an interruption of usability if you had owned an Xbox One.
No, no, you're right. It was at least partially this week.
You know, the two days between Friday 17th at 11:26 and Monday 21st at 11:19 that I didn't make any posts. Thanks for implying that I'm a liar (or at best misrepresenting the real situation), though.
I mean, pscahaw. Who plays games on the weekends, right?
Oh, since you're interested in my posting history, you might have noted a strange gap between Wed May 1 at 9:02 PM, and Monday May 6 at 2:07 PM. Huh. Three days. Kind of a long time, for me, isn't it? I mean, I'm here, like, all the time. It's almost like I was somehow not able to access this website during that ti- oh, wait. It's because my internet went down. Or that weird gap between March 23rd and March 26 (it's on page 5 of my post history at the time I'm writing this). That's a couple of days. Or the gap between March 17th to 19th (that's Monday the 18th, for the curious)!
I mean, it's almost like it's a semi-regular pattern, or something. Like, you know, maybe I have a spotty internet connection. Weird.
Now, I'll be the first to admit that I'm often busy on Sunday - sometimes way too busy to even post that day. But it gets a little sketchy when it's Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. Or when there are gaps between Monday and, say, Wednesday.
Of course, the other reason I'm often not on during weekends as much is when our internet goes down and stays down, it tends to on the weekends. I mean, there's also real life stuff that keeps me busy for days, too. You wouldn't know that, necessarily, just from checking my posting history. But I can even post without internet! It's because of my iPad, you see!
But, you know, since you're checking out my posting history to verify my claims (because you clearly don't trust me and are presuming I'm - at best - misrepresenting or exaggerating the situation), you'd likely know all of this. Unless it's just a cursory examination to try and prove me wrong.
Also worth noting: the fact that there is even a thing in which it is possible to contemplate requiring putting a towel or duct tape or anything else whatsoever over a device for the purpose of keeping it from watching/listening to me at all times is... creepy. I don't have to be doing anything wrong, it's still creepy. That was a very funny post, though, and I laughed.
Again, I'm definitely not buying one. But the fact that they're making so many mistakes and in such a large, heavy-handed way is enough to make me want to speak out, however little good that does.
And, I'm sorry, Scott, but:
I'm not blaming people because of where they live (they're not at fault for anything, so blame doesn't enter into it). But I am saying that if you choose to live somewhere with unreliable or non-existent access to one of the most critical pieces of modern infrastructure, you shouldn't be surprised or offended when you find yourself being unable to participate in certain aspects of modern life because of it.
Sounds an awful lot like saying, "I'm not blaming you for anything, but I'm blaming you for choosing wrong."
I can see how that's not clear. So let's make it more clear why. See, saying, "You've got to take the full results of your own choices." (which is what you're saying) has the natural and automatic corollary of "So if you can't enjoy this, it's your own fault for the choices you made." And, you know, that's true in life. Almost always, in fact. But personally? I had no idea about the infrastructure here prior to moving here. None. Kind of hard to make an informed decision, yeah? Thus it's pretty harsh to call me out on making the wrong choice when I wasn't informed. Of course, even if I was informed, it would have been hard to turn this place down seeing as we needed to be closer to family, get better paying jobs for both of us, and find to a place to live where our neighbors didn't get robbed regularly.
If it's a simple or easy choice (it's not, but the tone of your post seems to convey that it is) than the only reason people don't have access to heavy broadband is... um... they choose not to?
I can guarantee that this isn't true. Not for me, and not for my friends. And all the arguments on this issue smack of elitism and a general attitude of the "have nots" being inferior to the "haves". And even if that attitude doesn't actually exist, it sounds like it does, which is a problem for Microsoft and those that are supporting the XB1.
ANYWAY. I'm out. When people start checking my posting history to prove a point to me, I'm no longer wanted in the conversation. Later.
|
|
A lot of bitterness around here with respect to how awesome or not a person's internet connection is...
At any rate, there's a big difference between
"So if you can't enjoy this, it's your own fault for the choices you made." [with regard to living in a location with poor available connectivity]
and
...you shouldn't be surprised or offended when you find yourself being unable to participate in certain aspects of modern life because of it [living in a location with poor available connectivity].
I live in a place with atrocious connectivity, especially if you want to play online. I don't complain because online gaming often requires a superior connection. I know the current limitations of connectivity in Alaska. I'm not surprised that an online game of Halo is almost impossible.
As to Haves and Have-Nots...I'm a Have-Not, and I don't see any elitism.
Always on gaming is NOT a good thing. There is no benefit to the user. Cloud gaming has potential to benefit, as some processing power can be handled off-site, but again, it becomes unusable whenever their servers go down or are overloaded, or something happens to my internet, etc.
It's not a feature for me, it's a feature for them. If they lowered the cost of games to account for THEIR added benefit, I might accept the argument, but they want me to pay more so they can add a feature that helps them, but does little to nothing for me.
Microsoft is trying to pass this all off as being "great new features", when really it's anti-piracy measures. They are pissing on my leg and trying to convince me it's raining.
I live in a place with atrocious connectivity, especially if you want to play online. I don't complain because online gaming often requires a superior connection. I know the current limitations of connectivity in Alaska. I'm not surprised that an online game of Halo is almost impossible.
This is understandable, but why are you okay with needing a semi-regular connection to play OFFLINE games?
|
|
I live in a place with atrocious connectivity, especially if you want to play online. I don't complain because online gaming often requires a superior connection. I know the current limitations of connectivity in Alaska. I'm not surprised that an online game of Halo is almost impossible.
This is understandable, but why are you okay with needing a semi-regular connection to play OFFLINE games?
I think it sucks! In fact, my number one reason to keep my 360 is because I'm in the military--we often go places with our consoles (many units have consoles in rec rooms that get packed up and travel with us when we deploy), but Internet connections tend to be satellite-based and are very expensive and dedicated for actual official use, not online gaming. If the mandatory connection thing with X1 is the final reality...
Nonetheless, I'm happy to see the tech employed. Eventually, we'll all have proper connectivity, but I don't expect moneymakers to build in hits to the margins to keep me (and the ever-smaller population of unfortunates) happy.
As it is, I carry my 360 to work when I have overnight duty. I'm frustrated beyond words that my all-time favorite game--Fallout NV--requires a connection to employ elements from the DLC. But I get it; I'm not actually mad.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because I could never write better than David Wong of Cracked
The Youtube video at the end of that article ("Xbox One Reveal 2013 Highlights") had me in tears.
Ah hahahaha
That "Call grandma!" bit...
I am currently confused. The whole point of the Kinect (which I bet will throw up an error screen if anything blocks it's camera that stops play) is to make the console more readily available to the casual gamer market, and it's meant to be easy to use for home entertainment, and thus expand it's market beyond hard core gamers.
But it's also insisting on forcing these online checks. Do they last a minute? Ten minutes? Do we know? Remember, about 65% of Americans apparently don't have broadband at the moment, even though 93% have access to - are Microsoft assuming there exclusives (pretty much the only reason to buy this instead of a PS4) are enough to make those people upgrade to broadband, or are they content to loose 35% of Americans who don't have access to, can afford or want broadband currently?
It seems we are getting two very contradictory messages from Microsoft. You have to have an use the Kinect suggests aiming at a casual market, as does focusing on it as an entertainment system. Forcing online checks and artificially keeping game prices high by removing second hand options (you think new games are going to drop nearly as fast on the Xbox when no one has a choice?) along with an apparent switch to primarily digital distribution suggests a hardcore gamer market that won't like having the Kinect rammed into there favourite series.
It feels like the One is trying to have something for everybody, but it's mostly having something that will turn everyone off.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is important: do you really believe that there is no substantive advantage that a permanently-connected console offers over a gaming PC?
Does belief come into it? Seems to be simple factual reality: there is no substantive advantage that a permanently-connected console offers over a gaming PC.
Zero.
Not one.
Then I'm sure no one will buy them.
The next generation will almost certainly not sell as well as the last. It's an evolutionary shift, not a revolutionary one, and the casual gamers attracted to Wii and Kinect will now be playing tablet and phone games instead. The hardcore are probably going to be irritated by the relative lack of progress graphically (the new consoles are better, but they're nowhere near as better as you'd expect after an eight-year wait) and these social and DRM features are just annoyances.
They'll do well. But they won't do brilliantly, and it'll be interesting to see if Sony will even survive the process.
are Microsoft assuming there exclusives (pretty much the only reason to buy this instead of a PS4) are enough to make those people upgrade to broadband, or are they content to loose 35% of Americans who don't have access to, can afford or want broadband currently?
This point cannot be stressed enough:
Microsoft have gone completely insane over the last few years.
If you look at the decisions Microsoft have made recently, they are almost completely divorced from logic. They were unimpressed by tablets, so completely failed to produce a tablet until Apple were already on their fourth generation, joining the party way too late. The same for smartphones (although I have a Windows smartphone and it's great, they let Apple get too much of a head start).
Having decided to join the tablet race way too late, they then rammed a tablet interface as the primary way of using Windows 8, a primarily desktop/laptop OS. Not as an optional interface for the 2% perhaps of users who'd make use of it, but as the only way of using the thing. They eliminated the interface advantages introduced by Windows in the first place, made things too confusing for established customers (in W8 it takes multiple clicks to do what you used to be able to do in maybe 2 at the most) and did not provide substantive alternative reasons to upgrade (W8 is faster than W7, but not by much). The result is that W8 has been a failure.
So yes, Microsoft honestly appear to believe that HALO 5 (which likely won't be out until late 2014 at the earliest) will be compelling enough for people to spend substantial sums of money on broadband or, in extreme cases, paying to upgrade their local infrastructure. I'm going to argue that, probably, that won't be enough. Certainly not when people can go get a PlayStation 4, get all of the same advantages and considerably fewer of the disadvantages, not to mention rather more exclusives.
|
|
Which contradicts your statement that they are trying to expand into the less tech savvy market.No, it doesn't.
They are making the classic mistake of entrenching when they should be attacking.They are "attacking".
They aren't. They are focused on milking the pennies out of the used game market at the expense of reducing purchases of the actual product they produce.
http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/general_discussion/f/3817/t/1362841.aspx
I'll just leave this here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not reading or commenting on the current posts, because I'm busy, and uninterested in having more aspersions cast at me.
I would like to apologize for the harsh tone of the previous post. It may have been irritating of people to suggest something about me, but the tone was uncalled for. It was late and I was being spoken of like I was being deceitful at best. Apologies for the tone, though not the message.
If you don't see me around the next couple of days, at least for now, iit's not because i ragequit or anything, but rather at least partially because my Internet went out. Funny timing, really. (I am posting from my iPad, for the curious about my current posting.)
Anyway. I also realized one other reason I dislike this stuff so much. 1982 may have passed us by without the eponymous book coming to fruition, but I am a father and gamer and a scifi nerd. I'm not interested in my son having to live in a world similar to the one described in that book or, say, Shadowrun. This kind of tech made mandatory instead of optional certainly feels like a step in that direction, however small, especially with patents that require the tech to comly with a corporation's arbitrary definitions.
Scott, you're probably a great guy. I don't hate you. In fact, I, for one, think the potential of the ki next is phenomenal. It makes me hopeful for the future. Microsoft's handling of the kinect (and XB1), however, does not. Your allowed to like the XB1, and that's fine. It's great, in fact, for you, if you do. Others, however, are equally allowed to loathe it for very legitimate reasons which have been made pretty clear in this thread. Dismissing them offhand as "nerdrage" (as on, i think, the first page of this thing?) does not make you look like a great guy, even if you are.
Either way, peace to you. I'm going to go not have Internet now, and instead enjoy not having a device watch me to make sure I comply with Microsoft standards. Also family fun time. :)
I am currently confused. The whole point of the Kinect (which I bet will throw up an error screen if anything blocks it's camera that stops play) is to make the console more readily available to the casual gamer market, and it's meant to be easy to use for home entertainment, and thus expand it's market beyond hard core gamers.
But it's also insisting on forcing these online checks. Do they last a minute? Ten minutes? Do we know? Remember, about 65% of Americans apparently don't have broadband at the moment, even though 93% have access to - are Microsoft assuming there exclusives (pretty much the only reason to buy this instead of a PS4) are enough to make those people upgrade to broadband, or are they content to loose 35% of Americans who don't have access to, can afford or want broadband currently?
We've been over this.
Among active internet users (which is a broad enough classification that it's really difficult to imagine the sort of person who wouldn't qualify but is still considering a next-generation console), broadband adoption is above 93%. It is probably safe to say that the majority of the remaining 7% are the sort of people who are not even a little interested in the Xbox One. At most, Microsoft is looking at making it impossible for 2 or 3% of their potential market to buy in.
It's easy to say "Oh my gosh, they're losing 35% of their customers," until you realize that the vast majority of that 35% have zero interest in video games.
Anyway. I also realized one other reason I dislike this stuff so much. 1982 may have passed us by without the eponymous book coming to fruition, but I am a father and gamer and a scifi nerd. I'm not interested in my son having to live in a world similar to the one described in that book or, say, Shadowrun.
But... but... but that would be so cool.