238 replies to this topic

[Eddard McHorn Van-Schnuder]

500 GB....is nothing compared to the file size of these games.  Doesn't one game alone exist somewhere between 20-40 GB?  10 of those, and you're already halfway/almost maxed out.

No. The PS3 already forces you to install most games, and at most we're talking 10 gigs of space. You're not saving all of the disc's content on the drive, just some of it to help it load faster.

 

As for adding more space, Microsoft has confirmed that it won't be possible to replace the original hard drive, but you can use an external one through the USB-ports. So don't worry about the space, it'll be fine. It's also unlikely it'll be too expensive, as you implied, Koh. Microsoft has been pretty good when it comes to console prices in general, and I think this will land around the same price the 360 was launched with (which, might I add, is less than what's being projected for the PS4). Then again, we don't know yet. But to assume it'll be 'too expensive' without having anything to really back up such a statement with... well, it's pointless. It doesn't get us anywhere, it's literally just meaningless words on a page.

 

As for the console itself... it looks alright, I guess? I'm not too hyped, though I wasn't really hyped about the PS4-announcement either. I'm glad we're getting new consoles, because it means PC won't be held back as much anymore. For a while. Maybe a year or two, if we're lucky.

 

Also, there is no doubt in my mind that it's going to play used games. Microsoft has already confirmed this, but it seems like people just won't drop this silly rumor. This is pretty simple. Consoles are sold through gaming stores, mostly. Most of these stores offer a used game-selection. Most of these stores earns most of their income from used games. If a new console couldn't play used games, stores like GameStop would start yelling at Microsoft right away, and considering Microsoft relies on these stores in order to push new hardware... well, cooperation is required between them.

 

We might see some sort of 'online pass' feature used in order to 'combat' used games, though this is already being done. If you buy Battlefield 3 on a console and then sell it to Gamestop, the next guy who buys that game won't be able to play online without paying a small fee first. I can see this becoming more of a thing, even though EA has recently stated they're ending their online pass-strategy, but if does, that's the choice of the developer, not the console manufacturer. Hope that clears things up a little.

[Koh]

Just thought I'd share an interesting, backed up "essay" of sorts shared to me through Spriters-Resource.  I'm sure it's worth your time.

Alright, if you’re a consumer and you’re considering picking up the new Xbox One console, then please, take a moment to listen to me. Before we begin, no, I am not a fanboy or a hater. I have no console Bias. I have a PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, and a Gaming PC. Each has their pros and cons but now onto business.

 

DO NOT BUY AN XBOX ONE. Why? See the reasons below:

 

Xbox Requires an internet connection. Here’s how it works: Every 24 hours your Xbox will try to connect to Microsoft’s servers for verification. If it is unable to connect, sucks to be you. You’re blocked from playing even single player games until it can connect.

 

Source: http://kotaku.com/xb...lay-o-509164109

 

Do you like renting games, lending them to a friend, or even borrowing them from a friend? No longer possible. Every Xbox One game you get must be registered to your Xbox live account to be played. After that point it will only work for you. No one else can use it unless they pay a fee. Essentially it works like this. You pick up a used Xbox One game from somewhere or someone, pop it into your console. The system verifies it’s been registered to your account. Uh-oh, it isn’t! In order to play it, you have to pay Microsoft a fee, which is currently slated to be full retail price. Doesn’t matter how scratched up it is or how cheap you got it at gamestop or from a friend. You aren’t just buying the physical copies anymore. You’re paying Microsoft for a LICENSE to be allowed to play that game.

 

It is worth mentioning Microsoft is exploring ways for you to trade in and resell your used games. This is rumored to mean that you can sell your digital license to play the game (registration) back to microsoft, likely for microsoft points. You can then trade in the game at gamespot for some cash if you like. Either way, as it currently stands, the new owner would still have to pay a fee on top of the price of actually buying the physical copy.

 

Source: http://www.technobuf...l-retail-price/

 

Is it worth mentioning that Microsoft if shafting Indie Developers as well? Where as on Playstation Network or (whatever the Wii has) Indie Developers can self publish their content easily. Playstation even encourages this. Microsoft however forces these Indie Devs to enter publishing deals with them to be allowed to market their content. You don’t go through them, you don’t get to sell what you developed.

 

Source: http://www.ign.com/a...ish-on-xbox-one

 

I’m not quite done yet! Now, I’m sure you heard a lot about “TV TV TV TV SPORTS TV TV SPORTS SPORTS TV.” Yes, the Xbox is slated to be able to stream live tv, live sports, etc. So let me ask you this. You obviously already have something like cable or DirecTV. Do you really want to shell out hundreds of dollars more and pay a monthly subscription fee to have another television provider? Yes, I said hundreds of dollars, and I don’t mean the cost of the console. To view live TV from the Xbox you are required to purchase ANOTHER separate device for it to work. Why would you even consider shelling out more money for something you already have anyway? Even if you didn’t, DirecTV is cheaper. Or you could even subscribe you Hulu.com and watch live tv on your computer. FOR MUCH CHEAPER. You essentially have to buy another cable box if you don’t have one. And if you do… what do you need the Xbox One for?

 

Source: http://www.vg247.com...eparate-device/

 

So far we’ve discovered that the Xbox One is not really a gaming console, at least… not a consumer friendly gaming console. It’s being marketed as an all-in-one home entertainment system. Something to replace all of the other devices in your house. But there are drawbacks even to that. Put on your tin foil hats for this part folks. Take from it what you will, all I’ll say is… possibilities…

 

The Xbox One’s features will not function unless the Kinect is plugged in and active. This is not an optional piece anymore.

 

Source: http://www.ign.com/a...kinect-attached

 

So imagine your Kinect piece breaks? Tough luck, no more Xbox for you. But you know what’s worse?

 

Pay attention, because this is important. The Kinect is always watching. Always listening. Even when the system is off.

 

Yes. One of the ways to turn the system on is to audibly say: “Xbox On” while the system is off. The Kinect, which is always on, hears you and turns it on. Now this might seem like a cool feature, but did you know Microsoft patented a feature that would allow the Kinect’s camera (It’s no longer just a sensor, but a camera) to spy on you for the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America?) While they may not actually do this, it is actually possible for them to do this now. It has a camera, and a microphone. The Kinect is always on. It is ALWAYS listening, ALWAYS watching.

 

An idea has been tossed around that by using this feature, it will allows game developers and movie produces to set a limited amount of how many people can be allowed to view the entertainment. So as a hypothetical example, you and three friends are watching a movie, which is the maximum allowed. A fourth friend enters the room and the Kinect’s sensor registers the fourth individual. The movie stops and you a prompted to pay a fee so that the extra individual may also view the film. Again, that is NOT currently the case, but these are the ideas currently being tossed around with the system’s current capabilities.

 

Source for listening: http://www.theverge....lways-listening

 

Source of spying: http://www.extremete...ou-for-the-mpaa

 

Now, just two more things and I’ll be done here!

 

This isn’t really a good or bad thing, but it’s annoying. It also explains how they can prevent you from playing a used game if you didn’t pay their fee. Xbox one no longer plays games off the discs, you HAVE to install them to the hard-drive in order to play them. I believe PS3 also has you do this (on a number of games but not always it seems), except that PS3 isn’t trying to Nickle and Dime you at every corner. It also seems according to this article there is something related to the Online portion at the beginning of this post. The option is there for Developers to require the Xbox to always be online to play their particular game. Well, it seems PC gamers and console gamers have one thing in common now… DRM.

 

(At least pirates on PC can bypass DRM easily. Not an option for Consoles.)

 

Source: http://www.theverge....e-game-installs

 

And last but not least, another annoyance… Xbox One will not be compatible with any and all current headsets. Nope, companies will either have to make new headsets altogether specifically for the Xbox One, and they have to adhere to what Microsoft wants. Look forward to price gouging.

 

Source: http://www.ign.com/a...gaming-headsets

 

Oh, one more thing… If you have an Xbox 360, don’t get rid of it. Why? Well if you want to keep playing your old 360 games you’ll need it. The Xbox One isn’t backwards compatible. At all. Not only that, but President of Microsoft’s Xbox Division Don Mattrick insults the very notion of backwards compatibility! He calls it: “Backwards thinking.”

 

Source: http://www.theverge....ds-compatibilty

 

Source of insult: http://www.polygon.c...ng-don-mattrick

 

 

That is all I have to say currently folks, and I hope you took the time to read this far. I’ll conclude with the following… please… PLEASE do not buy this console. Paying for this supports greedy and anti-consumer business practices. Speak with your wallet, and pass up the Xbox One. No matter what games it might have that you want, even if they are exclusive. Do the right thing and make a statement. Refuse to be nickle and dimed like this. Refuse to be seen as a mindless consumer who will buy anything tossed to them.

 

We won’t know much else until after E3, but as it stands now, the PS4 or a decent gaming PC is the best way to go.

 

If you are willing to do so, please spread this post around. Liking is not even remotely necessary, but do please share it if you agree with and acknowledge what you’ve read here. The more people know, the fewer of them waste their money.

 

Thank you, kindly.

 

~Dylan Jordan

Edited by Koh, 25 May 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Nicholas Steel]

Yep, the Xbox One and PS4 are totally not gonna sell at all and people will only buy Wii U because it has backwards compatibility unlike the others. Besides, we all know how terrible PS3 did because it couldn't play PS2 games, yeah, I don't think anybody bought a PS3.

 

I think a lot of you are overreacting about the lack of backwards compatibility. Sure, it would be more convenient, but it's not the end of the world. Remember when there was no such thing as backwards compatibility? We didn't have a problem then. Why should we now? I tend to hoard old consoles anyway, so this really won't affect me at all.

Well technically the PS3 didn't need backwards compatibility because they were still making and selling PS2's... so they technically had it throughout most of the PS3's life as a costly physical add-on so to speak, early adopters got the functionality for free.

 

Also the PS3 has I believe always supported Playstation 1 games?

 

Also the PS2 beat out the Xbox and Gamecube and was the only system then that had full backwards compatibility (Excluding the Slim models) which probably played a large roll in the decision making of newcomer's to the Sony franchise.

Edited by franpa, 25 May 2013 - 08:19 AM.

[Russ]

Also the PS2 beat out the Xbox and Gamecube and was the only system then that had full backwards compatibility (Excluding the Slim models) which probably played a large roll in the decision making of newcomer's to the Sony franchise.

Not exactly a fair thing to say, since Xbox was the first Microsoft console, so of course it had no backwards compatibility. But yes, one of the reasons I picked a PS2 was because the PS2 could play PS1 games, but the Gamecube couldn't play N64 games (understandably so in that case, but still).

 

Regarding the massive thing Koh posted... yikes. I can honestly say after reading that (assuming it's all true) that I want nothing to do with this console.

[Eddard McHorn Van-Schnuder]

The Gamecube was the first Nintendo system not to use cartridges, but I think it's important to remember that the NES, SNES or the N64 all had the same lack of backwards compatibility.

 

I've said it before, but users complaining about a new console not playing their old games has got it all backwards (badumtish). See, it's not just the physical format of the games that have changed, but the hardware as well. This is important, because it does cause issues when it comes to running games made for an older system. An easy way to look at this, is how most PC's today don't run games from even just a couple of years back. Sure, it's rare, but if you go even further back, if you want to play some of those old classics you're gonna have to do some emulating - the PC won't run the game out of the box. The 360 could play some old Xbox games, but it was very limited, and all of them required you to download some sort of plugin. The issue is not so much that Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo are too lazy to put something like this in, but that it's just too much work for something that they're not going to earn any cash by doing. I mean, old Xbox games barely sell, and if you think that argument is stupid, because who cares about money, then you obviously don't understand how business works.

 

I get it, it'd save space in front of your TV, but come on - if anyone seriously thinks that the lack of this is a dealbreaker, then I really do feel sorry for you, because backwards compatibility - while relatively new in the gaming industry - is not something that we're going to see a lot of. The only reason the Wii U let's you play Wii games is because the hardware inside the machine, while more powerful, is still a lot like what was inside the original Wii. Nintendo's next console, given that the company decides to make a decent next-gen console, probably won't play Wii U games. I am willing to bet on it (as a side note, it's probably not going to be named 'Wii-something' either, hehe). Backwards compatibility did exist before the PS2, but people are acting as if this is a feature that's basically expected of a new console. It shouldn't be - it's a new console, it plays new games. You've got your 360 for the old ones, and if you sold it because you thought One would play all your old 360-games, then that really is your fault - I mean, anyone who knows even the most basic elements of both how this industry works, and how hardware plays together with software, knows why backwards compatibility should never ever be expected.

 

In the end of the day, it's nice to have, but it shouldn't be what makes or breaks a console. Regardless, I'm still not buying this console day 1. Same for the PS4, and the Wii U isn't even a next-gen console, so that doesn't count. I'll stick to PC, and that's not just because I know PC is the way to go if you want the best of the best, but also because none of the new consoles really excites me a whole lot. They're nice, but they've got nothing that I don't already have on my PC. That's not counting Microsoft's new push on TV-content, but we're not gonna see that feature over here in Norway anyway.

[The Satellite]

I honestly couldn't give a crap about any of it. The internet connection thing is dumb, but won't be a problem for me personally. Ya know, unless there's some big internet blackout in the area. And if it were a regular blackout, well, I wouldn't be able to use the console anyway because there's no power.

 

The used game thing is a minor concern, especially if the resell thing goes through, because that actually sounds pretty interesting.

 

The indie developer registration thing is no different than on 360.

 

The streaming thing, well, let's be honest, did we all just expect we'd get all these free services just because we owned a console? No, there has to be some kind of subscription, or the streaming companies wouldn't get a profit. Yes, it may be cheaper or "free" on other services, but those are still paid subscriptions.

 

Alright, so the Kinect being required is dumb. But also negligible. Just set it up somewhere, make sure it's safe and protected, and now it's no longer an issue. And not even Microsoft would be dumb enough to add a system that turns off movies just because more than a certain amount of people would be watching. As for the spying thing, well, if you're that concerned, unplug it when the system's off, but I don't think Microsoft would really use it to spy on people; that's an invasion of privacy and they could get into a lot of legal trouble if that was the case.

 

Mandatory install? 500GB hard drive, and game data doesn't often exceed 10GB, and even then not by much. 

 

Headsets? Well, weren't all headsets for the 360 required to be built to its specs? Sure, reusing headsets would have been nice, but why is this a big deal?

 

And since backwards compatibility being negligible was already touched upon, I'll end there. So far, literally the only issue I see with any of this is the Kinect thing, and probably the used game thing unless Microsoft smarts up. Some of the other features may be annoying, but they're not console-killing features. People will likely shrug and get it anyway. People who love Xbox will still follow the console. Microsoft has an audience, and like Nintendo, they're not gonna lose it just because of a few perceived screwups. Plus, it's still early, and Microsoft may take time to remove some of these unwanted features, or at least make things better. The release is still a long way off, after all; give it some time, because they make things better... or worse.

[Koh]

This is all I have to say to your post TS.

 

 

http://wiiudaily.com...increase-in-uk/

Edited by Koh, 25 May 2013 - 06:08 PM.

[Eddard McHorn Van-Schnuder]

http://wiiudaily.com...increase-in-uk/

Good for Amazon I guess. Those console adopters are gonna have a great time with the Wii U and it's amazing range of quality titles though, especially in the future when all the new games are gonna be released on the platform.

[Dawnlight]

I saw the ports of Xbox ONE, and I noticed a lack of AV Component cables. I have to say that MS better not have HDCP on their console with their games (though the 360 had HDCP for video applications such as Netflix). That would really suck for HD PVR and Elgato users. The PS3 had full HDCP which meant the only way to capture video from it was through AV Component cables. Imagine how Machinima would suffer from this issue should Microsoft block the recording of gameplay commentaries. 

 

And should we even call the Xbox ONE a gaming console? Like I said before, I think of it as a Roku 3 on steroids.

[Ventus]

And should we even call the Xbox ONE a gaming console? 

I know I'm not calling it a console. Its more like a cable box that can play games and limit you viewing of things.

[Koh]

The XBone can let you watch TV ON YOUR TV, while you play games ON YOUR TV.  Who'dve ever thought of such innovation!?

 

Oh, I seem to have located my channel-changing remote.  

[Eddard McHorn Van-Schnuder]

Come on guys, we haven't seen any games. That doesn't mean there won't be any games. I too think it was a big mistake of Microsoft not to show any games, but you're being irrational - it's going to have a whole lot of games, and that is going to be its main focus. It's a gaming console after all, regardless what you want to call it.

 

See, here's the thing. I get what Microsoft was doing here, even though I don't dig it. I'll put it in very simple and quick terms, because I have other stuff to do than to write another long ass post about 'protecting' a console I'm not even all that excited for myself. When you're a big console manufacturer and you're going to do a press-conference at E3, you're given a limited amount of time. At the 21st, when Microsoft had their showing, they spent roughly one hour showcasing their new console, and focusing mainly on its new interaction with the TV-medium.

 

As I said, this took them one hour. That's one hour gone from their press-conference at E3, had they not done this early reveal. One hour that Sony would have been able to spend on other things, considering they too had an early reveal. That's a big issue for Microsoft, so they had to follow suit, because otherwise their big E3-one would have had less time to showcase all the games they've got planned. 15 games, in fact. We might not get to see all of them, but I suspect we're gonna see most, because now they've already shown their console and talked about the TV-stuff. Now they've got one extra hour to show you all the latest games that's going to come out.

 

So what exactly are you all complaining about? You're beginning to sound silly. And don't trust rumors until Microsoft comes out and talks about whatever it is rumors wants you to believe. Rumors are not fact. Wait and see before you make yourself look bad on public message-boards.

 

Lol, I wrote another long post anyways. Oh well. And look, now I also said 'lol'. Is it too late to say I'm sorry?

[Koh]

Who said there wasn't going to be any games on it?  Most people are just not expecting any unwashed out console exclusives (yet another FPS, etc.), which overall would mean "what's the point, when I can just play it on X that I already have?"

[The Satellite]

And should we even call the Xbox ONE a gaming console?

 

To be fair, Microsoft is marketing it as an "all-in-one entertainment system." So... a computer. But pretty much what Robin says; that does not mean in the slightest they're shying away from gaming. Heck, I still see it as them wanting to branch out since they've already had a good handle on gaming since... well, the original Xbox. Though I admit Microsoft's lack of exclusives other than Halo. But that's enough for a fanboy like me. >_> <_<

[Koh]

I just can't grasp the futility of what they're marketing....This is what it seems like to me. 

 

You own a TV.  You know you can switch between an input channel, and the channel your satellite cable box is on with the press of a button.  But apparently, that's entirely too much work.  Why should you have to do that when you can just pay money on top of the money paid for a gaming console on a timely basis to access a limited number of channels?  It's totally absurd to have cable or satellite of some sort and a gaming console at the same time, because input channels are not enough to combine the two into one being.