On another note, Its really funny to me the way people keep making a big deal out of kinect when at the same moment they are making these meme's they have a webcam pointed straight at them..... 90% if not more of the laptops being sold have webcams on them that are more accessible to a hacker without the person ever knowing that the camera was watching them. How long has this been around? Over 10 years and now people don't give a crap about it but when the Kinect comes its all of a sudden a big deal. I mean, cell phones have cameras, laptops have cameras, tablets have cameras, Gameboys have cameras, red lights have cameras, cars have cameras, cameras have cameras but the only fing camera people are worried about is the one pointing at your living room while you play Xbox...... Okay, some have it in their rooms but how many times did you do disgusting things in front of your computer? That was not creepy? Or disturbing? Knowing that a webcam connected to the world wide web was pointed straight at you?..... PLEASE... People want crap to cry about.... Those who think Microsoft is digging their own grave are seriously wrong... They know thing we don't. How hard would it have been for them to make a new console with upgraded console, xbox live, and a flashy new menu with a slightly redesigned controller.... Not hard at all, that's what ps4 did..... Props to them for actually trying to make a product that does more than just games.... And please, don't come to with I just want a console that plays good games..... If that's the case then, trade in your smart phone for one that can just makes calls and use your computer for internet and apps..... Nothing wrong with a console that can do more.... And yes, they are pretty much screwing some people in rural areas over. People in the army, younger kids with no means to buy games. But then again Nintendo and PS4 may be the system for them. And thou its wrong, Xbox seems to be okay with it....
I think many of you are overstating this...xbox one will kill it. And PS4 will be right there as well. Both systems will do very, very well.
Nope. This entire time Sony has been capitalizing on Microsoft's dumbassery. Not to mention they are heavily promoting the living **** out of "The Last of Us". Microsoft is dead. What a bunch of r****ds to think that people want an always online, Kinect always watching, DRM-heavy console. I hope it bombs, and I hope everyone pirates the **** out of everything Microsoft. **** them.
The very things that are pissing off the so-called "core-gamers" will eventually be what will give the Xbox the edge. 1. Used games: The industry current business model is flawed as the window for publishers/devs making a decent return on investment is ever so small. That's where the comparison with the movie and music industry fails. Movie-makers can still control the window for making money through movie threatres before relying on DVD sales which can be impacted by the "used" DVD market. as for the music industry, the sale of music on a physical medium is now a joke but the industry can still make a ton of money through Itunes (that can't be resold) and live events. The game industry mostly has the sale of physical discs as its major revenue source. "Core-gamers" want games with better graphics and gameplay but don't want to pay the price for it, undercutting developers by reselling their games in the first two weeks of release so as to reduce their investments to a minimum. While an ingenious strategy, it will eventually mean the demise of the industry as rising costs collide with dwindling revenue. And that's where a system like the Xbox one is a game-changer (pun intended) as it offers publishers and developers the ability to control the window of revenue generation; any "core-gamer" will now have to pay up or forget about indulging in their favorite hobby. "Core-gamers" on Neogaf and Gamefaq may protest as much as they want but gaming as a licensed service is the future because it is the only way in which the industry could still be viable. Sony and Nintendo betting on the status quo are implicitly endorsing a doomed business model. 2. The days of the Big Three selling consoles at a steep loss while hoping to make it up in sales of games are over. "Core-gamers" have never been the lifeblood of the console making industry; the much larger population of "casual gamers" are. However consoles are vying with mobile game platforms for the hearts, time and wallets of those "casual gamers". Buying a gaming console is a very big investment and the comparison with platforms like smartphones and tablets who can do much more than running games is ominous. In short, a gaming console should not be restricted to gaming to be successful. Xbox one is up to now the only console that explcitly affirms this. Hence, the focus on TV apps, telephony and movie/music streaming in the reveal. "Core-gamers" protest that the reveal was misunderstanding their needs and was off-putting. They are of course wrong as the reveal was not directed at them in the first place but at casual gamers. MS was basically whoring itself to that particular consumer group: "Your mobile can do a lot of things apart from gaming? Big deal! Our product can do even more!" To the "core-gamer" this may sound ridiculously stupid but to the "casual gamer" it aptly answers a very pertinent question :"WTF do I do with that $400 gaming behemoth when I don't feel like gaming (which is quite often, hence the "casual-gamer" tag).By letting the PS4 being pigeon-holed as THE console for the "core-gamer", Sony is facilitating MS job in product differentiation with the consumer group that really matters.
You are paying $65 including tax for a new game. There is no comparison to spending $10 on a movie ticket or 129 cents on a song from iTunes. With used games blocking, you are increasing the price of a game by lowering its value and charging the same amount for it. People aren't going to accept it. You speak of the video game industry dying. Well this is how it's going to die. Core gamers scoff at the used game policy/DRM and WILL "forget about indulging in their favorite hobby" and all of a sudden consoles are dead because there is no demand. The games industry has crashed before, and it can crash again. I believe we are at a tipping point with the price of games. $60 is really pushing it, $70 and I don't think people will buy games anymore. Lowering the value of the game whilst charging the same price is the same thing. This CAN work only if you lower the price of games. Steam works because the prices are low and they routinely have sales. Therefore IF you lower the value of something, you should charge a lower price for it. There is zero indication that this will be the case. That said, I do think the PS4 will have a similar ploy but leave it up to the publishers to decide whether they want to block used games. I believe that this is a tricky slope and I don't support it. I won't be getting a PS4 either if they come up with something similar to the Xbox One, I'll just build myself a gaming PC.
and I can't understand why people like andersongo or Salvy can even try to defend the used game policy? Either they are video game developers themselves or they are complete stooges for Microsoft. It hurts the consumer any way you look at it.
I don't really get all the b****ing. If you don't like what Microsoft has put out there, then buy the PS4. Simple as that.
This thread is supposed to be an informative discussion on the Xbox one. All of this saltiness is getting in the way of that.
This is true. Publishers just want to make the most money, and while this policy might allow for that, selling to a much bigger userbase (with no such policy) could net them more money. Those aren't exactly the same thing, and I'm not sure why you think it is (similar to people who think MS is just doing what Steam does). Webcams and the like generally aren't "on" all the time (or phoning "home" every 24 hours). Users can shut them off (i.e., turn off you laptop, the camera is no longer on...or you probably could just shut off the app that turns it on). Kinect is "always-on," "always-listening," and all that. You literally have to unplug it to get it to stop. I actually don't care about that as much as others though, I admit. I don't care for it since a lot of it isn't necessary, but I think it is possible we'll have more and more devices like this ("always-on Siri"). Should be done better though IMO. Given that they've adjusted their policies after finding out what the gamers thought, it seems we know things they don't too. I don't know if they're digging their own grave (companies have bent over consumers multiple times before without suffering too much), but this isn't a good thing (unless you're a MS shareholder). When it comes to features, PS4 will likely do more or less what Xbone does. So don't think it is really too hard (hell, PS3/360 do much of it to some degree, as do other devices). I don't really think they deserve any props for that, especially if they lose focus on the games. Doesn't help that the Xbone can't completely replace other devices (e.g., cable box), so it is difficult to justify using it instead of "native" devices. A smartphone, on the other hand, can replace other devices completely. Though when it comes to bending over gamers, PS4 might not match them, but again, I'm not sure that's something to be happy about. I'm not necessarily doubting the Xbone will do well. Probably will (especially if PS4 does something similar). But this isn't good for gamers or the industry IMO. Basically hurting gamers without giving back anything in return. Similar to MS charging for online play IMO. At what point would you guys agree that this is just a bad move? Would charging for every save game ($1 each?) be OK? While I agree somewhat, the game industry could just come up with new revenue streams for games (and they have). I'd rather they pursue that instead of biting the hand that feeds them. The success of projects on Kickstarter and other indie games shows this isn't exactly true, despite what publishers continue to believe. Publishers have allowed game budgets to get out of control IMO, and now they seem to blame gamers for this. It is a complex issue, but budgets could be scaled back quite a bit while still allowing for great playing (and great selling) games. I guess that is a bit of a risk though, and in an industry that just likes pumping out the same old same old (which is part of the problem to begin with), it might be hard to convince publishers to try that. You're assuming there is only one solution to this problem, and MS has it (and Sony/Nintendo don't). There are multiple ways of addressing it. MS is taking one approach, which IMO, does more harm than good. I think I posted this earlier, but there was a study I posted earlier that indicated such a move could actually result in less profit for publishers (depending on how they price their games). Don't think that will really help this doomed industry. You might be underrating core gamers a bit. Casual gamers make up a larger portion of console sales, although core-gamers would generally buy more games (and of course, that's where these guys make their money). Also more reliable to lean on (ask Nintendo), would be open to other revenue streams (DLC, ads, etc.), etc. They can be very profitable for these businesses, whereas a "casual" gamer may just buy the system and only watch Blu-ray movies. Plus the core gamers generally help with marketing your console, games, etc. The gaming industry relies heavily on word of mouth. This is false. None of these consoles are restricted to gaming, nor has there been such a console for quite a while. MS isn't really doing MUCH new, other than spending a lot of time/money focusing on it (though not enough to really make it a device that can replace all alternatives IMO...not yet anyway). I understand that this is what MS was doing, but I'm not sure it was smart or the right thing to do. You're trying to sell a $400-$500 device (which will probably be somewhat buggy, limited, etc. at launch). Why are you trying to sell to the casual market? They'd rather just stick with what they have (especially if they're "Internet-only" like me). Get a Ouya for $99 and get a Roku for $99. Spend the other $300 on a fancy smartphone. What's so special about the Xbone that you have to pay $400+ for it? The guys that WILL spend $400+ on such a device were pretty much ignored. Gamers are pretty dedicated, so it probably won't take much to get them back on-board (just need to show off a few good games). But I think it would have been smarter to get them riled up first (the people who will be buying and using your system first), then gradually focus on the casual market. It is generally what has worked well in the past (while the flip side of that generally hasn't worked so well). It is a message board. If you got rid of all the b****ing, we might only have around 4 or 5 posts.
Thank you, this is exactly how I feel..... There are three platforms yet everyone is trying to jump on Xbox...... Get the one that works best for you, everyone is going crazy over Xbox One..... Truth is, Xbox One is the only true next gen console and because Xbox is changing things up everyone who wants the next gen console is disappointed. I have three choices of cars I want to buy... Ford Mustang, Chevy Corvette, Porsche 911.... Well I want the Porsche but its sooo expensive :/ tear tear..... Maintaining a Porsche is sooo expensive tear tear I hate Porsche for being so greedy and making things so expensive and screwing the consumer over.. Well here is the good news, the Chevy Corvette is just as fast if not faster, cheaper, easier and cheaper to maintain... But it still aint no damn Porsche, close enough thou.... Yall dont want a One, get a Ps4 and be happy....
Sony fanboy much? I have no beef with MS used games policy as long as they made it clear that what the customer is paying for is not ownership of a game but access to a service with the physical discs being merely an accessory toward this end. If the customer can make such an informed choice, then what's the problem? As for the price of console games comparison with Steam prices, it is a disingenuous Chicken/Egg conundrum. Surely for the console prices to rival Steam prices they need the same advantage being currently enjoyed by Steam in terms of no parallel "used" games market so as to cut prices and bet on a larger base of customers to recoup investments without the serious threat of used games capturing a sizable share of potential customers. The two basic variables are price X of games and Y numbers of customers. Steam can bet on a lower price of games by balancing it with a much larger potential base of customers due to no used game policy. Devs/Pubs making games for consoles cannot make such a balancing act and have to rely on high prices to attempt to recoup investments. Concerning me being a stooge of MS....LOL....but if you are a card carrying member of the Sierra club you can legitimately brand me as a scion of Big Oil...
It is a discussion on a policy (or multiple policies) put forth by MS. People aren't "jumping on Xbox," although if you were expecting only praise for it, then sorry to burst your bubble. You can discuss these points independently of other platforms or even the question of "which one is for me?" It is a great discussion point (tons of posts on other gaming boards, not to mention all the mainstream articles being written about this), so I'm not sure why there is such opposition towards discussing it.
I'm not against discussion of it..... I'm against whining and crying about something game developers themselves don't understand yet. A lot is yet to be figured out so its a waste of time crying about it. Lets discuss it not whine about it. On top of that, nobody is actually discussing Xbox One... Everyone is attacking it for who knows what reason when PS4 seems to offer every single thing "gamers want"..... But lets be real here. PS4 seems to be like the console people don't care about or talk about it... So far, Xbox is winning at getting known and how does that saying go? There is no such thing as bad publicity..... Yeah that..... I get the feeling Xbox is going to outsell PS4 by a large margin....
*sigh* Forget about the PS4. This isn't some Xbone vs PS4 battle. We aren't saying "Xbone sucks, everyone should get a PS4" (OK, maybe some are, but we can ignore those and stick to the other posts). A lot of us (myself included) assume PS4 will also do some of these "anti-consumer" things when it comes to DRM, so a lot of these "Xbox attacks" would apply to the PS4 as well. We're focusing on MS because they're the only ones to put out their plan/details, but if you want, a lot of this can apply to Sony/PS4 too (or consoles in general). So the discussion isn't "Is PS4 or Xbone better?", but rather is this type of approach is good for gamers, the industry, etc. If MS does this but the others done, how will that affect these companies? Comparisons to Steam, previous consoles, etc. Is giving up our privacy worth it? Etc., etc., etc.
Skipped over this post... I don't think people disagree with this (although I would throw in the fact that there are many other factors that go into these prices, including some that might even be more influential). It is clear (well...sort of) why publishers price console games the way they do currently. With MS addressing the used game "problem," console games can gain the advantage you're talking about. Given what you said, it would seem likely then that publishers would start coming up with more affordable pricing for their games. But many of us are skeptical about publishers reducing their prices (myself included). If I can grab the new Madden on Xbone for $30-$40 at launch, then I'll start to reconsider my stance on this policy. But I'm assuming EA will price it at $60 (or more), and thus, I'll receive no advantage for giving up my rights as a gamer (you can argue whether I should have had those rights to begin with, but the fact remains that this is what gamers are used to). As stated multiple times, if this results in lower gamer prices, this might be a worthy compromise between gamers and the industry. But so far, I haven't seen any sign of reduced prices. With all the negative press MS has received, you'd think they would mention this major benefit to gamers. Not a peep so far.
