I have never been less interested in a console.

Alex seems like a Debbie Downer.

Is anyone really that surprised with this reveal. Statistics show people use their game systems more for netflix/hulu etc than games. However I see no need for a new system if my current one, and oh yeah my smart tv that doesnt require anything hooked up, already does all that.
Then their target audience is sports and FPS.

Really no surprise and no reason for me to get it.
(Probably be referred to as X1)

THE JACKEL

The Xbox One (not a good name, but better than Xbox 720) looks nice. However, I think it is dumb that you will need an Internet connection and have to register a new game before playing it. It's better than the rumor that you would ALWAYS need an Internet connection to play games, but it's still dumb that you will need to register every new game you buy.


Also, Microsoft missed a BIG chance to stick it to Sony. The fact that the Xbox One won't play Xbox 360 or Xbox Live Arcade games is a huge disappointment, and means Wii U is the only next-gen system with backwards compatibility.

The most exciting thing announced today was that it looks like the d-pad will be functional this time. Only took Microsoft 12 years to figure that one out.


If the "potential scenarios" of requiring an internet connection once every 24 hours and effectively killing used games are true, I will never buy the XBONE. Period. Same goes for any other console that thinks things like this are good ideas.

I haven't seen any reports of needing a Internet connection once every 24 hours. Phil Harrison flat-out said you just input a one time code, then you can play it forever whenever you want.

And you will be able to sell your game to others, but apparently you will only be able to sell it digitally for the same price as a new copy of the game (so if the game is still $60, you will only be able to sell it for $60 digitally).

XBONE has a rapey vibe to it.

http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-does-require-internet-connection-cant-play-o-509164109


Microsoft has since told Polygon that this is just a potential scenario.

Microsoft is making sure everybody gets XBONE'd this generation

Well, let's look at the positives...

Someone will mod the Xbone's d-pad into a 360 pad for a whomp-ass PC gamepad.
Remedy still exists.
And..
... uh...
... ... that's it.

I think the staff thinks how I thought about it.

Interesting stuff, but why upgrade from a Xbox 360 if you have one? All of the big games for the holiday are coming out for both Xbox 360 and PS3. I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I'm going to say by the end of 2014, PS3 and 360 will still be the main consoles.

Yes, you read that correctly. After the 2013 holiday, Xbone and PS4 are going to sell just as well as Wii U is now. Gamers don't want to pay $500-$600 for new consoles when their current consoles can play all the big games. No reason to upgrade unless you have to have the new hotness. Third parties are going to start saying, "Yeah, we like the market size of the 360 and PS3, so we'll stick with that."

The game industry is set for a crash - at least the console one.

And Nintendo is fine. Wii U can have it's year long slow start - 3DS is going to own the holiday thanks to Pokemon X and Y. Nintendo will be rolling in dough.

Edit: And the fact that you have to pay MS more money for each account on the Xbox for one disc that you own, and that you have to do an install key to play the game is a huge bad thing. What about people that don't connect to the internet? There is still like 30% of the gaming community that doesn't. Xbone not even an option for them - but some will buy, be pissed, take it back, and cause a REAL TV media backlash!

http://youtu.be/lVUsFXE2DkI?t=2m48s

If I don't have the ability to play offline/share games etc I wont be getting one. If it requires a check every 24 hours or so. What happens in 10 years?


The disks are gonna be worthless, may as well just go digital only.

I'd imagine at the end of Xbox One's life, Microsoft shuts off the online required thing. Or they tell you to fuck off. Possibly both?

Don't know how true it is now since PR for MS keeps contradicting what Phil Harrison said, but Kotaku posted:

"Other users on the console will be able to play that game as well, Harrison said. So you don't need to buy multiple games per family. "With the built-in parental controls of the system it is shared amog the users of the device," he said."

Might as well re-post this from the Durango Rumors Thread:

"Today's reveal basically ensured that I will not buy an Xbox One (and I was open to the idea after the PS4 Reveal), thus making me interested in the PS4 again.  No backwards compatibility, a mandatory once-every-24 hour "check-in"/"call home" policy, price controls on Second-hand software, mandatory Kinect, the absurd amount of focus on TV integration, their general smug douche-iness on stage today, and their general lack of interesting software just completely turned me off the system.  Looks like this next generation is Sony's to lose...surprisingly."

It's not an upgrade if you can't take your 360 games with you.

I will go on even bigger limb and say that by 2014 3DS will be bigger than both. It has already overtook PS3 in US.

I think even during 2013 holiday Xbone (x-bone, heh) and PS4 will sell less than Wii U.

What will motivate gamers to buy new consoles?

Destiny? Watch_Dogs? Available on Xbox360, PS3 and Wii U.

What will motivate gamer who was exclusive to other platforms (xbox or wii)? Forza? They didn't cared about Forza this entire gen, why do you this one will move them? Same goes about PS4, by the way, i don't care about Killzone and Infamous why these new installments should motivate me towards buying PS4?

This used games thing... This might take a toll on retailers specialising on gaming only, which will shrink the market considerably either moving game and console sales to universal retailers or into digital space.

The presentation was disappointing, and that was before everything about XBox Live authentication, required 'net connection, and always on Kinect got out. No way, no how; I've had enough of MS with the 360.

  What I'd really like to note is EA has since apparently changed their mind on Wii U support. http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/21/ea-developing-wii-u-games-after-all

One of the worst console reveals ever. 30 minutes in before games are even mentioned. Games were either generic or multiplatform.


TV, TV, TV, TV.


So it's a glorified, motion-controlled DVR with Skype? Big whoop. And COD: Ghosts? One of the least impressive game reveals I've ever seen. And I can't even take my hypothetical copy of COD: Ghosts over to a friend's house to play it on their Xbox One. (And I better not hear anyone complain about the Wii U's name being confusing after this crap)


That being said, it may have been smart for them to get all this crap out of the way so they can focus on games at E3. We'll see how they handle that. But as it is right now... this console isn't even on my radar.

Actually you can. Just login as yourself on your friends' Xbox and download the game (i think you on current Xbox you can even skip downloading part if you put the game on flash usb drive or something).

Ok... so I CAN play it at a friend's, because I can link to my account? But I can't just use the disk? I guess that's not horrible. Still annoying and tedious and doesn't make this an attractive product.

BINGO. I can't wait to hear everyone who complained about the Wii U name making it sound like an add-on trying to defend the Xbox One's name (especially since many people refer to the original Xbox as the Xbox 1). I have no doubt Xbox fanboys (and Xbox podcasters, like IGN's Podcast Unlocked) will say there is no problem and it will not cause the same confusion.

It's actually pretty neat because this will also save your progress, your XP and achievements and stuff you got while playing on someone else's console.

On the other hand if you want to have different accounts for your kids (for parental controls and such) and want to play the same games with them you will probably have to buy the game twice or thrice, even if you're only playing on one console.

So what happens when gamers share their accounts? do they get banned if two different Xones log in with the same account at the same time?

See my earlier post, where is was already confirmed that multiple accounts on the same system can play a game without having to re-buy it. So if you buy a game and link it to your account, and your kid has their own account on the same system, they can play the game too (for free).

It's not specific to new Xbox's.

All these accounts' shenanigans are already "been there done that" for PS3/Xbox360 gamers.

Honestly i don't know about restriction on multiple connection to the same accounts on Xbox360, but from what i read PS3 supported five consoles connected to the same account at the same time. I think it's been reduced to three or something.

It will for sure? Or are you just assuming? Because I haven't heard of this anywhere.

I'm assuming because it's been working that way on 360 for years now.

Are you a Nintendo gamer only?

Again with this guy. Please try to make at least one post that doesn't make you sound like an ass.


I had forgotten that you could do that with the 360. Because, you know, nobody used it. Because when we wanted to play a game on someone else's system we just took the disk over. I remember we tried to do it once and it took forever and was a total pain.


The reason I doubted you is because lots of news coming out about the xbox one is pointing towards this not being a possibility. At least not without a fee. News is still unclear on all the details though.

Who the fuck are you? I was simply asking. WHere the fuck did you read malicious intent in my post? I was fucking asking you because generally if someone is a Nintendo only gamer, there are certain things they aren't used to.


The only ass in this thread is you.

People, people! Let's be nice ;D

This is the real news to connect to Nintendo. Suddenly the WiiU doesn't look like a bad system to invest in after all?

I haven't been up on console news and had no idea Microsoft was going to be making an Xbox announcement today.

I woke up kind of late, opened up Chrome, and saw some stuff about "Xbox One."

I swear to you I thought Microsoft was giving the original Xbox a "PS One" style treatment.  I was expecting a extremely slimmed down, sleek looking console with a screen attachment, repackaged with portability in mind.

I was wrong.

I mentioned this in the other thread. "Wii U" is confusing for the people Nintendo presumably kept the "Wii" name for. They were conditioned to associate the Wii-branded products with Wii which makes sense until you launch a successor with a similar name. That's the main difference here. The Blue Ocean is an audience Nintendo spent an entire generation chasing and they're the ones who don't get it. Microsoft's demographic is composed primarily of core gamers. "What's an Xbox One? Oh, it's the thing that plays the next Halo."

Yes, it's needlessly complicated. However, the original Xbox hasn't been on the market in years. If Microsoft went from the original Xbox to Xbox One, they would have a problem. We're removed far enough from the original Xbox that this isn't really an issue. Xbox One also doesn't look very much like any previous Xbox whereas Wii U is very reminiscent of Wii.

I'm not saying Xbox One is the best name for a new Xbox or even a good one. For me, it's functional, but I would know what it is no matter what they called it.

To be honest, I was expecting "Xbox 1080" (to emphasize 1080p graphics), or something that didn't involve numbers at all. I'm curious to know what other names they considered but rejected.

I don't think the XBox One name is nearly as bad as many people are making it out to be.


That doesn't mean it's good... but I understand how a marketing team would love the name, and think that the average Joe will be ok with it. Nobody who is in a position to be confused knows or cares about the original XBox anymore, and since that isn't an active product (unlike Wii/Wii U) there won't be in-store confusion to worry about.

This. A thousand times this.


As someone who still plays his original NES, the thought of leaving MS in control of me accessing my games in the future is terrifying.


Maybe they'll just "disable" online checks at the end of the console lifecycle.  Maybe they'll just decide when it's no longer profitable for them to maintain the service and then kill the whole thing and force you to either upgrade to the next XBox console (if it has backwards compatibility - don't hold your breath) or throw your collection in the trash.


This probably doesn't affect their target market, who want annual updates for sports titles and the latest FPS to play online.  But this presentation made it very clear to me that I'm not part of their target market to begin with.

I'm very glad to see the lack of backward compatibility with the PS4 and One.  It is not worth the compromise of sticking to an old architecture, and includes the benefit of cheaper and faster PC ports.  That could benefit all of us.

My reaction to the press conference was boredom.  They showed very little to be excited about, with the focus on media features.  Still, it's a new system and I have no doubt that it will be a good one eventually.  Like the 360, it may have a rough start.  They didn't show much practical use of the Kinect or the new controller, but hopefully both will work seamlessly with Windows 8.  I'd rather buy those than the console.

How are there this many posts in this thread, and yet NOBODY has mentioned that this thing looks like it's one flippable door and some buttons away from looking like the first VCR/Betamax player your parents bought?

At least the comments have gone into the intense debate on how Microsoft has effectively negated almost any reason why you would buy this device over a PC outside of maybe some sort of dynamite exclusive or the honest to god NEED to voice control your television out of laziness of not wanting to use a remote.

For YEARS now, one of the primary arguments pro console gamers used to defend their preference over PC gaming was that they didn't have to deal with Digital Rights Management bullshit getting in the way of lending a game to a friend or keeping you from getting a bit of return on investment if you get a game you honestly are never going to touch again and don't want for your collection. All this multimedia device crap outside of TV TV TV TV can be achieved by your PC and in a much more elegant fashion than talking to the Kinect... which by the way, weren't Microsoft talking about making a PC compatible Kinect anyway?

with the lack of emphasis on those games that should be the chief moving power behind this behemoth Blu-ray eating 8-track player is really concerning... why could they not hold onto their britches to show this thing at E3 where there'd be more of an impact as you show it off with games?

Hell, they were gonna reveal this thing earlier in April, but they delayed this a month already so they could respond to the Playstation 4, which Sony had WAY the fuck more together and actually showed a couple of interesting titles and kept the focus on the GAMES of their GAMING CONSOLE!

Xbox One's focus on 'oh, it's a multimedia device!' reeks really bad of the 3DO. if this were the 90's, we'd be hearing the "Multimedia device" buzzwords be thrown around like crazy. ugh. this really is kinda sad that Microsoft has lost their way and this could really be the beginning of the end, regardless of the Xbox VCR's success or failure.




Maybe I'd consider buying it if it were actually a water cooler as well.

Xbox One looks like a Blu Ray player or DVR which I felt was the entire point.

And I was always under the impression that Microsoft entered the gaming market to make it part of a multimedia device. They wanted to stop Sony from taking over the living room. Even Nintendo has strayed from the dedicated gaming console philosophy with Netflix, YouTube, TVii, Miiverse and including a web browser. Home consoles just do so much more than they used to. Unlike 3DO, the technology supports it now.

The problem with Kinect for PC is Proximity.  The Voice the Items all could be achieved with a typical mic.

I don't see why people are surprised about Microsoft focusing on multimedia features with the Xbox One. They've been going this route for years. They want the Xbox brand to be the central media device in the living room.

I have to be honest, neither Nintendo nor Microsoft have made a particularly compelling case for why I should buy their system. As an 'undecided voter', so to speak, I'm definitely leaning towards the PS4. I am, however, open to the possibility of being swayed by any one of the big three.

Some people, like me, have PCs hooked up to big screens and do not sit right in front of them.  Still, the new Kinect is supposed to work up close.  We'll have to see how it plays out in the real world.

In terms of the current Kinect, the version for PC use is redesigned to be able to work close ("near mode").  The bigger issue is that the original Kinect PC version is not very high resolution and geared more toward business use, so games were not made for it.  It would make sense for Microsoft to push this new Kinect as tightly integrated with Windows 8, since the interface makes so much more sense now than it did with Windows 7.

This is true, but focus of a console has never strayed this far from games is the point I'm getting at. I guess one could argue that Microsoft put on this show much like the Wii U Nintendo direct right before E3 to discuss the miiverse so they didn't have to spend press conference time talking about this sort of stuff.

At the same time though, they took just barely enough time to highlight a couple of teaser trailers for games at this Microsoft thing; Games that they didn't want to show any actual gameplay of. I'm pretty sure we got more than just Forza Motorsport 5 trailer playing in passive for a few seconds in that Miiverse Nintendo direct demonstration last year.

My point is that Microsoft sent a message here that games are the afterthought. Watching TV through this thing is what you want. Watching sporting events with a slight bit of interactivity with your fantasy league stats pinging up like you just got an achievement for Devin Hester getting a punt return is what this device is meant for. ohbythewaythisplaysvideogamesandourtriggersonourcontrollerhaveaforcefeedbacksystem, But back to the sports! EA is all about the sports, just like they're all about putting DRM into console games! oh, and let's have a montage of interview as we walk around a football stadium and sit by our glorified DVR in the locker room! Even the games we ARE going to talk about have to be TV-like or be TV adaptations of games!

THAT is where I'm getting the 3DO vibe from; this obsession with making games be these "it's like interactive movies!" experiences. Indeed, the technology has caught up with the principle a little better and you're not just letting any chucklehead make a video game, but it still just reminds me of that way more than the gradual build-up of features that was the 360.

Looking at the reactions on different gaming sites a common theme I see is "who is this for?"  They went on and on about all this non-gaming doodads but who doesn't already have other devices that can do that?  Always online and locking out used games sure is nice for MS but there is no selling point there for consumers.  But then "who is this for?" has been a question directed at the Wii U as well.

We don't really need a new console generation yet.  I felt that Nintendo needed to catch up to everyone else but that's it.  The obvious improvement and need for a new console is not there.  But getting us to buy a new system every so many years is the business model and the hell do they want to give that up.  Nintendo has gone with gimmick controllers to justify new hardware.  Microsoft has gone with multimedia funcationality and, even though Sony seems the most promising right now, they went all nuts about social media in their presentation.  They can't just show us some games that look out-of-this-world compared to the previous gen and immediately sell us on the need for a new console like they could before (and they struggled enough with this last gen).  So the question "who is this for?" is coming up because none of these companies know who the product is for because they're not even sure WHAT the product is for.  The purpose just isn't there so they come up with any justification they can and they're going more with non-gaming functionality because they can't sell us the need on moderately prettier games.  "Throw whatever you can into it and hopefully the consumers will think they need one."

I remember being blown away when I saw a Banzai Bill in a Super Mario World commercial.  "Holy shit!  Look how big that Bullet Bill is!"  Instantly sold me on a Super Nintendo.  They can't do that anymore so they're telling us we need a tablet controller and that we can watch the NFL.  It's like the console market doesn't think they can just sit tight until a true need for a new console comes up.  They have to get their shiny new product out before the other guy's shiny new product takes over the market.  But what will happen now?  Are new consoles that exist solely for the purpose of being new going to sell?  Is the Wii U just the start of a general rejection of a new console generation?

As a set top box for streaming media and that kind of thing, it looks really cool, but as a game console it leaves a lot to be desired. If I could buy one for $150 with just the media stuff and without the game functionality I probably would.

$150 sounds about the right price for a high end something just for Media consumption.

i have a blueray player under that price point that offers more then what the one has shown

It plays high end games?

in terms of multimedia.

The Xbox One will have exclusive NFL access. Facebook, Skype, Internet Explorer, Netflix, Xbox Music, ESPN, live TV with voice recognition (including showing what is popular with your friends), Xbox SmartGlass support. If the Xbox One also gets the other media apps the Xbox 360 has, it will be a beast for multimedia.

One place the 24-hour thing could really hurt is if you take your system on vacation (not uncommon on road trips) and your timeshare doesn't have Wi-Fi. That could be an issue. Conventions might have issues too if their game room doesn't have wireless.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see how something like the PAX free play room works within these restrictions. My guess is Microsoft will step in with a solution, but for lower profile events that won't be possible.

I think the case against an always on connection has already been made. Sure, that's one game, but imagine it applying to the whole system.

And it will all be hidden behind a paywall.

Interesting observation:  Quantam Conundrum sounds incredibly similar to Quantic Dream, and said game appears to be Microsoft's "Heavy Rain"-styled game (I'm aware Remedy is the developer).


It's also sad that Microsoft's Xbox One was unveiled the same day this happened.

Interesting observation: Quantum Conundrum was already released last year i think.

Remedy game is called Quantum break.

All these names also all sound like Quantum of Solace and Quantum Leap. I wonder why... There's got to be some reason why they sound so similar...

That's the more exciting announcement methinks.

I'm allowed to chime in too, right?  ;)


It strikes me how everyone commenting on the Xbox One reveal, here and elsewhere, are choosing to focus (read: bitch, as gamers are wont to do) on games, when that was not the focus of the event itself. It was all about the hardware, the platform, and the partnerships, with a bit of gaming stuff thrown in there for the mainstream audience that tuned in.


Everyone here knows full well that Microsoft will fill in the games details for us in a few weeks at E3, where the focus is and will always be on games. To that effect, Microsoft, and Sony to a lesser extent, did something extremely smart: They let everyone know in advance what tech they're packing in their boxes for the next-next gen, creating buzz ahead of E3 and riding it into their press conferences, where they can wow folks with games, games, games.


(The way I see it, this could be why Nintendo is skipping a traditional press conference this year; they really don't have anything to attract attention to themselves before the show on the same level as Sony/Microsoft, even if their buzz being forced down our throats.)


Anyhoo, Microsoft got my attention, to the level that I think they've got some hella-impressive hardware in the One. The voice and gesture controls and especially the suped-up Kinect seem like a natural progression in gaming tech, to me at least. The idea of multitasking on a console is dubious from a gaming perspective, but for those less involved in gaming--say, those looking for a high-tech upgrade from the Wii, or in a few years the Wii U--might find that attractive. Might.


However, I've no interest in getting a One, or a PS4, or even a Wii U for some time, if at all. At the moment I'm content with PS Plus games on my PS3 and my PC/iPhone to fill in the gaps or kill time, rarely dropping more than $20 on a game lately. Right now the prospect of paying $300/$400/$500 for a new console and at least $60 a game, and another $50/$60 annual subscription (or the danger of the "Nintendo tax" on eShop) service is way, WAY too much to swallow, even if I could semi-afford it all right now. With where I am with life and with gaming right now, I'm happy to sit back and let everything play out, then come in if or when the time is right.


Although, the new Kinect looks sexy enough to consider getting the Windows version when that comes out. I'd love to see what sort of Minority Report stuff could come out of that.

WindyMan has a good point on the games, Microsoft said weeks ago that the full reveal (i.e. games) would be at E3. This was just a teaser for what the system could do.

Oh boy, would I kill for a Quantum Leap game.

MS could show Zelda for the One at E3 and I still wouldn't buy it because of the always-online and locked out used games.

Interesting note about Microsoft's presentation.  Didn't they say something about 15 exclusives with 8 being new IP?  Isn't it interesting that they felt the need to indicate that half of them were new franchises?  It's almost like that is some sort of SELLING POINT that one would want to brag about.  Maybe that will get taken into account next time the topic comes up in relation to Nintendo and the apologists come out of the woodwork saying that Nintendo doesn't need to create new IP and that the other guys only do it because their existing IP ain't no good.

Yeah, this presentation was not so much about the games but until relatively recently the idea of a new console's first public reveal treating videogames as an afterthought was unheard of.  Just the fact that they didn't consider the games to be the top priority for the console's first impression is not encouraging to me.  If games were the main focus they probably would have revealed the whole damn system at E3, instead of "saving" that for E3.  The vibe I get is that this is a multimedia center that also plays videogames as opposed to something like the PS2 which was a videogame console that also played DVDs.

1. Bragging about something doesn't make it a selling point.

2. Just because it's new, doesn't mean it will resonate with anyone. What if most of those new IPs Microsoft is trumpeting are Kinect games? Will you still be running your mouth about this?

3. Has anyone said Sony's and Microsoft's IPs weren't good? We've had this discussion 573726272 times. This isn't about quality. Rather, their IPs are generally not as strong as Nintendo's. They don't have anywhere near the history or evergreen status. For the X-millionth time, they're creating because they don't have what Nintendo has. Look at Sony. They tried to make another God of War in Heavenly Sword and it failed to match the former's popularity so they just went back to making God of War games. This is not rocket science, dude. While you keep bemoaning Nintendo's lack of new IPs, Sony and Microsoft continue striving for that kind of stability. These companies only create when they need to. When they don't, we get Super Mario 57, Halo Redux Evolved, and God of War Interquel 3 Ultimate Revenge. That's fine as long as they bring new ideas to the table. They can pump out cookie cutter sequels. They can also blow our mind with original ideas. That has nothing to do with the fact that an IP already exists. It's entirely dependent on what they want to do with it.