Xbox OneFollow

Can confirm gaming with kinect voice commands with children around sucks. Madden 13 let you voice activate almost every possible pre-snap call there is. I had to turn it off cuz my kids' random shouting would call blitzes and line shifts.

Come to think of it, Skyrim would have been pretty funny on xbox since my 2yo daughter goes fus ro dah crazy while im playing that game.

Edited, May 22nd 2013 7:42am by KTurner

I think this is what they are mistaking. Like you said they see the PC market and think "Oh well people dont mind it there" the reason we dont mind it is because a lot of use never pay retail. I wanted to play Farcry 3 Blood Dragon, but I wouldnt even pay 14.99 for it. I bought a code for 4.50 the other day. If MS is going to control the used game portions with the backing from the game companies, do you think the game companies dont have a say at what MS will be pricing. Nope. I expect to see used games way higher priced because companies only want their money and dont worry about the value to the costumer. Look at EA, they copy pasta Fif1 12 changed the logo to 13 on the vita and sold the exact same game as a newer version, they dont care.



I dont understand this mentality, your being charged to use the internet you already pay for. MS charges to "use their infrastucture" Sony doesnt. Sony puts that on the shoulder of the developers I believe, so its their job to make sure the netcode is good, not Sonys, they just provide the platform. As for the less network issues on Live I could back you up on this except Live is stupid easy to mess with. One of my friend used to play Halo 3 ranked a lot, one night one of his friends brought over his laptop and ran a packet sniffer to target the Xbox live code and insert intentional errors forcing the other side to hang and lag. I dont know exactly how it worked but they did it all night and won every game.

As I mentioned before PS+ IMHO is a better service than Xbox live(Gold) I mean in a year and a lahf ive spend 75 dollars. and received a TON of free games including 6 retail vita games if i pick up that system for free. Sony is putting value into the system while MS is putting ads to make more money.

I know I blam MS pretty hard, but the Xbox gold thing really gets me, because IMHO it preys on peoples niavity. Like the people with cable internet but still pay for AOL because thats how you connect to the internet is though AOL. My girlfriends mother was like this until I sat her down and explained it. She dropped AOL like a bad habit.

Anyway if you were looking at PSN Vs XboxLive you would have expected PSn to be the one to introduce Ads to offset its free nature, but instead the paid service is the one that has them.MS is slowly closing that gap to EA territory, they had an extremely popular console last cycle and now they think they're **** dont stink and they will be able to keep pushing. Kind of like Sony after the PS3, How did that turn out for them?

Sony this upcoming cycle is learning from their mistakes with the PS3 because they were headstrong, and thought they could do no wrong after the PS2. Atm I feel Xbox is headed in the same direction, because their system was he top hardcore unit last cycle that this cycle they can do what they want and consumers will eat it out of their hands.

Idk MS is lucky Xbox is still a thing honestly, If Halo didnt take off the original Xbox was dead in the water, They had the same games and a more powerful system than the PS2 and even had the basic network the PS2 didnt. But for the longest time the system struggled to find a base, they had almost no RPGs, their exclusives werent that great, or were overhyped and under delivered. Until halo 1 came out and became THE console lan party game, sales of the system were usually only to people into racing or sports games. PS2 t the time had the market with tons of games in every genre to fit many tastes. Its not the hardware that moves a system its the software (only applies to consoles)

Uhm just because Sony had the most press for it, every other company has done it. Apple tried it til the FCC ruled that it was ok to unlock a phone. Xbox has went after hacking sites, or worse ignored the high amount of hacking and selling of Xbox accounts saying its not their problem. I dont agree its ok what Sony did in the situation, BUT you need to remember piracy was rampant on the PSP and turned it into a dead system most of the world.

Previous systems had to be modded to be hacked, and modding was already illegal in most of the world. Also wasnt easy and you needed to find the parts then solder them in. The harder something is to do the less people waste time trying to do it. But because this new way was a software mod anyone with a USB jumpstick could open the entire system to piracy. I mean at first Sony was happy to include Linux capability on their system, the only reasons they really got rid of it was hacking scares because of it and honestly I dont think many people ever used it.

Actually if you look at my last post Sony also has been pompous and arrogant because their domination last cycle (PS2) They let it get to them and tried pushing where THEY wanted and not were WE wanted. Sony from the PS1/2 Era was a much different beast, wanna know why there is so many games for both systems, because they let everyone and their mother have a Developer Kit from EA to garage start ups. It wasnt until the PS3 that they began to restrict access to it, exactly like Nintendo did with the 64. They suddenly put huge pricetags on Kits/licenses pushing out the small guys that helped build them.

Sony has been losing money the last 5? years or so, and they know that if they keep going they way hey have been its going to kill the brand. I think they know, at least for the PS4, that catering to the consumer and indie is going to be the way to go.

Edited, May 22nd 2013 10:19am by BeanX

Ostensibly, they've already opened it. They cut development costs for the Vita, and they've lowered barriers for PSN publishing. Early return from indies seems pretty good.

What games come of it, we'll see. And I don't think there's any reason to think they'll "become the primary indie platform" - I doubt they even hold out that kind of hope. But they've already made moves.

Edited, May 22nd 2013 11:19am by Eske

That awkward moment when your Kinect recognizes you have a ***** and suggests **** sites.

Besides the obvious "anything is worth whatever somebody will pay for it" reply, how is it worth it? You pay (most likely overpay) for your internet already which is the brunt of the infrastructure, you pay for the games that have multiplayer as an intended game mode, and then you still have to pay 5 bucks a month to MS to play it?

Do you get anything else from XBL gold? You get to watch netflix which you already pay for too.

Because How many familys you think knew Xbox couldnt play games online without a fee when buying it for their children. When i was working as a Gamestop managers, other than RRoD at least 2 times a day I would get parents ******** about it, so much to the point that we had to inform everyone buying 360s as presents of the hidden charge.

I understand how you're justifying it to yourself. But you dont really get a choice, you either pay it or dont play online, simple as that. You pay for WoW because you like that game and see the value in paying the sub. But out of the 3 systems Nintendo and PS dont charge to be online, and they also dont toss ads on your paid service. Thats the big tipping point for me. I can understand having cross game chatting etc and having to pay for that service, but when you toss ads into something I pay for (I do NOT have cable) I drop you like a bad habit. Hulu plus did this to me on a free trial, I was going to pay for it so I could watch some anime without ads, yet still had ads I unsubbed less than an hour later.

If it was free and had ad's great dont mind. Also you can play WoW without paying (you just cant access end game).

Xbox Live sub costs breaks down to peer pressure + greed plain an simple, they dont give you anything that you cant get elsewhere and barely add any value to the service. Its there because Little jimmy cant play with his friends without paying it (Peer Pressure) and because MS can get away with it.

I choose to pay for PS+ not because Im forced to to play my games, I already bought, on my internet, I already pay for, but because It add value to my experience on that system. It boils down to the whole argument of companies cutting out parts of services/games to sell you later ala carte to put more money in their pockets

Edit: Do you think your enjoyment would be less without Xbox Gold, If so they are forcing you to pay, If not why pay for it at all? The whole arguement reminds me of this scene

Edited, May 22nd 2013 11:07am by BeanX

There are plenty of videos online of friends actively trolling their friends via Kinect.



I didn't say otherwise. I wasn't commenting on the potential, overall success of the device, I was just commenting on it relative to gamers.



Yes, but losing your core demographic in the process rarely works out well for companies. An expanding demographic and marketing strategy is great. Expanding your demographic and marketing strategy by moving to entirely new groups is a really poor one.

For one, it's a huge gamble. You're moving from a known quantity to an unknown one. The 360 was a huge success in the gaming market. Barring some extreme risk factors with the demographic (which I don't see here), it's not smart to just drop that.

That's because modern consumers have a VERY strong sense of brand loyalty, which translates to a very strong sense of brand betrayal. Central to brand loyalty is the notion of trust - your primary consumer needs to trust that you actually do have their best interest at heart. It's crazy, but it's essentially the center of modern marketing strategies. You NEVER want your audience to remember that your bottom line is a profit motive.

A perception that you're ******** them, or abandoning them, or don't care about them, is one of the best ways to ***** yourself out of your entire audience.

That can be fine, when you have a new audience lined up. If there was already an xbox in every home, for the purpose of a multimedia, then this would be a different conversation. But there isn't, because everyone who has an xbox 360 has one for gaming, primarily.

If you want to transition your brand, then transition it. You DON'T do that by abandoning your core demographic. You do it by creating a device your core demographic desperately wants (for all the things important to them), and then add a lot of features other groups want. But your first goal is to SELL THE DEVICE. Because profits and market momentum fund development and marketing to expand into those new areas.

The smartest move would have been to get every gamer possible excited to own this, AND include the cool new features that weren't gaming-centric. Then very actively transition the device and its marketing, over its lifespan, into one that's awesome for anyone with a TV. The NEXT device then launches into an audience receptive to all those other features.

The newer 360's do have a built in wi-fi, but you're right; it did take far too long to implement. Isn't that your choice? If you buy an Xbox and intend to play games online, you pay the $60/year. You can still play the single-player components of your games without Gold. If you want to play games online but don't want to pay extra for the service, than the Xbox isn't the system for you. It's not like they're not upfront about this.

This. My manager, who as far as I know doesn't even own a video game system of any kind, mentioned it yesterday. So did another non-gaming coworker.

I rolled my eyes both times. The only thing this new generation does for me is raise my hopes of getting a cheap used PS3 so that I can play the exclusives, and raising the bar so things look/handle better ported to my PC. I might consider the PS4 if it is backwards compatible, but otherwise meh. Really especially in the first 2 years of a console where there are no interesting games to speak of.

I watched the reveal trailer which apparently was released yesterday and it just seemed like 90% of it was showing what the console looks like. I thought they ditched the plan to ban used games on the system about a month or two ago?

One of the things I am curious about is the watching TV. Does this mean we plug our cable into the Xbox and completely remove the need for having our $10 a month DVR box from the cable company? Because that in itself would be an incentive to purchase it. Been nice if they had shown some games, talked about backward compatibility, gave some info on the specs, etc. Didn't really need to watch a minute and a half of video showing what the box looks like...

Apparently you still need your cable box. I don't know if the Xbox will have DVR abilities.