Those prices are a cover-ass guess. No one yet knows what they'll cost.
Xbox one
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
I like how he says "entertainment alter" a dozen times, evoking the idea that people who buy big TV sets and create a space to watch them are of a religious order he has finally broken free from.
And since he has made that change in his life, then he can't see the value of the Xbox one, which is really only for those who still subscribe to the entertainment altar.
In other, completely unrelated news, only 53 million LCD tvs sets were sold in the first three months of this year. Over half of those were larger than 35", and the 40" and up TV market is growing fastest due largely to price decreases for larger TV sets.
Fortunately Leigh watches his entertainment on a high resolution 10" iPad display, and that's the way he likes it, so the rising generation must be the same, and this must be the death throes of an entire industry.
I'm concerned he might have a somewhat limited perspective, but hey, if we're only going to move 200 million new tvs into homes this year, maybe we are watching the collapse of the entertainment alter.
I just doubt it. Slightly.
figmentPez
Staff member
Watching how you move around the store, you say? How Nordstrom [Used] WiFi To Spy On Shoppers
Nordstrom says they've stopped doing this, after public outcry, but they're not the only company taking advantage of a cellphone's WiFi signal to track your movements throughout a store. Granted, camera software can do the same thing, but I imagine WiFi tracking takes less computing power.
It's really a minor thing, and is news only because people are unaware that their phone blasts out a signal that can be easily tracked. However, it does show just how hungry companies are for data collection, and that it's important that we consider what should be private and what should be public. In an era when a great deal can be told about a person's health just with a video camera (heart rate, perspiration, etc.) it's time to re-think what data should be allowed to be collected about us without our consent. Just because we're in public, or have invited a device into our home, should not mean we've given consent to monitor our vital signs or otherwise acquire personal data that used to require physical contact.
Wow... and you're accusing me of anger, hatred and vitriol? I actually think the kinect itself is fascinating. The old one could be used for amazing applications outside of the xbox 360 (I had a friend and I rig one up to do rough motion capture for 3D models... it was incredible how decent the motion capture could be from something like that).
I don't like the always on always integrated new kinect and the possibilities it introduces sitting in my room connected to my media system. As a seperate piece of technology though? Fascinating.
It's doubtful Sony is going to have DRM at this point, or at least nothing very restricting. Why do I say this? This exchange on twitter.
Those are Sony executives joking about DRM in the open. Ether they know it's not going to be so severe/nonexistent or they are going to be out of a job in a few days.
It's a bit like Chekov's Patent, really. I see only one of two(-ish) possible applications for this patent.
1) Microsoft intends to use this patent at some point (in some way) to get in our personal business/mine us for info and is therefore evil.
2) Microsoft is actually concerned about our privacy and preemptively took out this patent intending to never use it, instead planning to sue anyone else who tries it to shut them down and therefore MS is good.
2b) Microsoft doesn't care about the ethical implications of doing such a thing, they just want to own the ability to do so and therefore MS is just opportunistic.
I'm sure MS knows all about backlash, and in reality they probably are hesitant to take full advantage of everything the console could do for them, I'm just not convinced they have the good sense not to try and glean a little something under the radar (Like Google, Apple, Yahoo, and any other data-heavy business currently do). Like an actual gun, the malice of the event will be defined more by the intent behind the action than the action itself.
--Patrick
1b) Microsoft is trying to keep bars and other establishments from using an Xbox to show paid content (like PPV/premium sports) without buying a group license. This seems the most likely case.
figmentPez
Staff member
I know that we're talking about always-on internet connection type DRM, but I really want to note that all the consoles have some form of DRM, and have since the days of the NES. Just because it's mostly unobtrusive, and doesn't usually get noticed beyond region locking, doesn't mean that it's not present.
Or the most likely possibility: someone had the idea, wrote up the patent info internally, and they patented it because it was patentable.
There are many, many, many patents MS, Apple, Google, IBM, Xerox come up with and submit because the cost, for them, to do so is so little, and if it's something they think might have any value in the future, they patent it.
In fact, many of these companies offer rewards to employees who go to the trouble of getting a patent for the company, regardless of the applicability to the current products the company produces. There are millions of "dead" patents that were obtained merely for the employee compensation in the software, automotive, aerospace, and other STEM fields.
Microsoft isn't doing to well in content distribution right now, so I honestly don't see them using it anytime soon. If it were amazon, netflix, apple, or even google, maybe. I suppose MS could offer this as part of the netflix or amazon streaming apps, but it's still likely years away due to negotiation. In order to make it work, several entities have to meet repeatedly to hammer out a whole series of contracts to solidify the chain and manage the resulting profits. And if someone isn't willing to pay the various middlemen for making this happen, then it's simply not going to happen.
I have a feeling they'll go back on the used game deal a bit. I wouldn't be surprised if they change it to something like being able to use a game for 7 days before you're locked out of it unless you pay the fee. That would give the used game market something to work with at least, and let people borrow a game to their friends.
It's all speculation still though. I'm sure we'll get a lot more info at E3.
It's all speculation still though. I'm sure we'll get a lot more info at E3.
I can also imagine them holding this patent mostly just to make sure. Not out of the goodness of their heart, but to prevent anyone else from hoarding all the monies or however you say it these days.
I can easily see a fitocracy-style game or Wii-fit-style thing giving you bonus points for everything you do in the living room, even without having to log in, turn the machine on, select the app, blahblahblah. Who knows, it could be something new and great. *now* we think it's an invasion of privacy, in 5 years' time, we'll be saying how awesome and revolutionary it is. MS has seen plenty of start-up markets pass them by while happily using their hard- or software (such as many of the "other" uses Kinects have already been put to). If and when people drop their privacy issues in favor of ease-of-use and gadgetry, as we always do in the end, at least they've got a finger in the pie.
I can easily see a fitocracy-style game or Wii-fit-style thing giving you bonus points for everything you do in the living room, even without having to log in, turn the machine on, select the app, blahblahblah. Who knows, it could be something new and great. *now* we think it's an invasion of privacy, in 5 years' time, we'll be saying how awesome and revolutionary it is. MS has seen plenty of start-up markets pass them by while happily using their hard- or software (such as many of the "other" uses Kinects have already been put to). If and when people drop their privacy issues in favor of ease-of-use and gadgetry, as we always do in the end, at least they've got a finger in the pie.
I'm cynically wondering if this is another reason they're requiring the kinect for every xbox one. They limit the free supply, and if you want a kinect you either have to order a replacement part (rather than an accessory), or buy a whole xbox.
On the other hand, it may be that they couldn't make this newer, better kinect and sell it for under $100, so by bundling it with the cost of the whole console it's easier to swallow for users that wouldn't buy it for $150.
It's more likely they are putting it in the standard kit so that devs will actually do something with it. It's sort of why most games don't have PlaystationMove support or why virtually no games use the analog stick accessory on the 3DS: developing a game to use these features heavily will severely limit your market, because the only people who can play your game are people who bought an accessory at a premium. This is a VERY basic rule of consoles and most people don't seem to get it.
The only reason the 360 had so many Kinect games on the 360 is because Microsoft was covering some of the costs of production. This let companies build crap on the cheap that they could sell, while pocketing most of the development money for use in future products.
Microsoft has opened their mouths about their policies now.
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/main
Honestly, most of what I've read is repulsive and solidifies my opinion. If Sony's policies are similar, I'm done with consoles.
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/main
Honestly, most of what I've read is repulsive and solidifies my opinion. If Sony's policies are similar, I'm done with consoles.
TLDR. Short version?
They confirmed most everything that everyone thought.
- You can share each game ONCE.
- Used game sales are on the publishers to activate. Because publishers are pushing for this anyway, this means 99% won't.
- You have to connect your One to the net once every 24 hours or you console bricks until you connect it. People with shit connections, military members are fucked. Or everyone, if the Microsoft servers go down (they will).
The only remotely cool thing they said today is that up to ten members of your family can play games you own and place in a shared account, but they haven't said much about how this works except to say that it won't be up at launch (so they probably shouldn't have said ANYTHING).
They had better have the best god damn exclusives in the world or they are fucked.
Necronic
Staff member
Still better than the Wii U. And aside from the items Ashburner mentioned that list doesn't look too bad.
The whole idea of sharing games is a tricky one these days. People want the whole disc-free method of playing. You don't get that and then get to trade games willy nilly. And sure, you can quit consoles to avoid that. Then you can go to computers where.....oh wait this is how computers have worked for ages.
The whole idea of sharing games is a tricky one these days. People want the whole disc-free method of playing. You don't get that and then get to trade games willy nilly. And sure, you can quit consoles to avoid that. Then you can go to computers where.....oh wait this is how computers have worked for ages.
I'm actually rather relieved by these claims. Is there something that I'm missing that makes it not as reasonable as it seems?
Basically they are saying you can play your games any time/any where, so long as you can log into your cloud. Sounds great. I don't see the problem with that personally. Certainly makes it easier for me to show up at a friend's place and say "Hey. Would you like to play any of the games from my library?". Sounds pretty reasonable and convenient. No need to carry your entire library of discs with you because you can access it on your friend's xbox one just as easily.
Now to the part about sharing your games with friends/families: what's the issue? It says you absolutely can share with your family and to at least one friend. Now here is a question, what keeps you from claiming additional friends are just part of your family?
It says you can share it, with one friend, once, as long as he's been on your friends list for 30 days. Fuck that control nonsense.
Or you can sell it to someone, as long as he's been on your friends list for 30 days or to an officially recognized Xbox Microsoft retailer. Awful.
All those options you do like, the 10 person thing etc, are all said to be not available at launch too.
This fucking gets my gall so fucking hard. This is one of the most disgusting pieces of trash PR speak corporate anti-consumer bullshit condescending nonsense that's ever been put out.
WOW, OTHER PEOPLE THAN ME CAN PLAY MY GAMES ON MY CONSOLE!
FUCKING THANKS MICROSOFT! THANKS FOR YOUR PERMISSION!
figmentPez
Staff member
"Loaning or renting games won’t be available at launch, but we are exploring the possibilities with our partners."
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-games-can-only-be-given-to-one-person-ever-511754913
I'm pretty sure GameFly saw this coming, but I'm betting they're scrambling desperately to try to work something out.
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-games-can-only-be-given-to-one-person-ever-511754913
I'm pretty sure GameFly saw this coming, but I'm betting they're scrambling desperately to try to work something out.
The only way it would work out is if GameFly started paying the pubs/devs when people rent their games... which is kinda bullshit.
