Don
Yup, Daily Fail at it's best.
**XBOX ONE** Official Thread
- Thread starter valkia
- Start date
Yup, Daily Fail at it's best.
Man of Honour
I wouldn't be too surprised if their stance had changed before the release of the console. Despite what most people consider stupid decisions, Microsoft on the whole are generally not a stupid company, and they will no doubt pick up on the overwhelming anger and frustration regarding their design decisions. Assuming this forum is indicative of the consumer base as a whole, MS will have to realise that without a major change (and fast), they will lose ground to PS4 they may never recover. The problem is whether their desire to be the number one console is stronger than their stubborness over their design choices. Time will tell I guess.
Soldato
I agree that they surely will have to change something before release, whether it's a price drop or the used game situation. But saying that if pre orders are high enough then they will have no need to, they will claim that "Customers are okay with it".
Well if you look at Sony they were too stubborn when the PS3 launched and that was obviously back off a dominant period for them with the PS2
Multi-nationals dont act fast, especially ones that have shareholders, theyll move but I dont see it happening by launch. I think the concerns about yields and hitting launch dates and availability to worry about more as a priority.
A price cut is more than welcomed but if they do it before launch that really isnt a great message and the first question will be 'Why couldnt you have priced it like that in the first place?', its not like theyve magically made it cheaper to produce...
ps3ud0
http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/11/4421314/electronic-arts-talks-drm-and-used-games
So it turns out Microsoft weren't pressured into all these horrible DRM features like everybody thought. They went ahead and decided to do this themselves. EA had no part in it.
So it turns out Microsoft weren't pressured into all these horrible DRM features like everybody thought. They went ahead and decided to do this themselves. EA had no part in it.
Caporegime
Says Ea. Shock.
I doubt he would straight up lie like that to be honest.
Man of Honour
I like one thing Peter Moore said...
If EA can see that with Online Passes, maybe MS can come to the same conclusion with DRM and the inability trade in games freely and easily. Who knows?
Caporegime
He doesn't have to lie, look at the wording
So they might not have absolutely demanded it, but there's nothing saying the didn't discuss it. EA are just trying to get some positive press out of it, I wouldn't take what they say as gospel.
Man of Honour
It's because it has to be plugged in for the console to work, so people are assuming that the Kinect is going to be sat there monitoring them and then uploading information back to MS for marketing purposes. This is despite MS stating that Kinect will not be used in that manner at all.
I think some people are just afraid of Kinect watching them fapping to Babestation to be honest.
And it's another thing you have to find space for that nobody really wants to use and is likely the reason why it costs $100 more than the PS4.
That's why I asked, I couldn't see anything official stating anything for anyone to be worried about.
I always thought Kinect sold quite well and the first few links I clicked on seem to corroborate this. Hardly a thing that nobody wants to use. Has this been confirmed as the only reason of the price difference?
I always thought Kinect sold quite well and the first few links I clicked on seem to corroborate this. Hardly a thing that nobody wants to use. Has this been confirmed as the only reason of the price difference?
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Yeah, true. I have no problem with Kinect as a device (I own one myself) but I would rather have the choice whether to get it or not. I'm guessing it's an essential because of the way MS are targetting the home market and using the voice commands to change what you're doing, Skype, etc.
Caporegime
The thing is they either had to include it or not bother. These optional peripheral just get ignored by devs unless everyone has one, why aim a game at a smaller percentage?
That's why I'm wondering why Sony has bothered with the motion controller that doesn't work out of the box and needs a separate camera? It sounds like a last minute thing that might just get ignored.
That's why I'm wondering why Sony has bothered with the motion controller that doesn't work out of the box and needs a separate camera? It sounds like a last minute thing that might just get ignored.
It will be sat there monitoring to an extent (at least the sound anyway), it has to be to know when you say 'Xbox On' surely?
Soldato
Totally agree. There are too many idiots out there who make a big deal out of nothing.
Some more detail and clarification is starting to appear around the DRM stuff. It appears that Microsoft is primarily aiming it at digital downloads in the future as a step towards allowing you to have a digital library of games you can play anywhere whilst reassuring the developers and publishers it won't be opened up to rampant piracy. Interestingly they didn't dismiss a "all you can eat" digital subscription model when it was suggested to them.
Interveiw at http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/
They also cleared up some more info about the ability to lend games to friends and family. In effect you will be able to lend a game to up to 10 nominated friends or family, the only restriction is only one person can play it at a time. Sounds really quite useful to me.
Since its announcement, there has been some confusion over the details of sharing your Xbox One game library with up to ten "family members." Mehdi couldn't give comprehensive details but he did clarify some things.
For one, a family member doesn't have to be a "blood relative," he said, eliminating the extremely unlikely possibility that the Xbox One would include a built-in blood testing kit. For another, they don't have to live in the primary owner's house—I could name a friend that lives 3,000 miles away as one of my "family members" Mehdi said.
You'll be able to link other Xbox Live accounts as having shared access to your library when you first set up a system, and will also be able to add them later on (though specific details of how you manage these relationships is still not being discussed). The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time. All in all, this does sound like a pretty convenient feature that's more workable than simply passing discs around amongst friends who are actually in your area.
Interveiw at http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/
They also cleared up some more info about the ability to lend games to friends and family. In effect you will be able to lend a game to up to 10 nominated friends or family, the only restriction is only one person can play it at a time. Sounds really quite useful to me.
Since its announcement, there has been some confusion over the details of sharing your Xbox One game library with up to ten "family members." Mehdi couldn't give comprehensive details but he did clarify some things.
For one, a family member doesn't have to be a "blood relative," he said, eliminating the extremely unlikely possibility that the Xbox One would include a built-in blood testing kit. For another, they don't have to live in the primary owner's house—I could name a friend that lives 3,000 miles away as one of my "family members" Mehdi said.
You'll be able to link other Xbox Live accounts as having shared access to your library when you first set up a system, and will also be able to add them later on (though specific details of how you manage these relationships is still not being discussed). The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time. All in all, this does sound like a pretty convenient feature that's more workable than simply passing discs around amongst friends who are actually in your area.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
I read that as well, and if that is exactly how it will work (effectively allowing your 10 best friends to access your game library for free), I can see huge benefits to that. Why buy a game if my friend has? Just wait until he's finished with it then play it myself. That's a potentially huge feature for MS, and possibly another example of a great long-term strategy getting lost in the really poor message they put across at E3.