Xbox One - General Discussion Thread

[Deader2818]

I have a DS4 sitting on top of a 360 controller right next to me. Its like the same size. I think maybe you just prefer off setting analog sticks.

 

[phantomfriar2002]

I know this is obvious, but it's also worth remembering for all the talk about resolutions and everything else that we're at launch. Things are going to get better, they aren't going to get worse. From all the COD discussion, it seems the issue is as much to do with Infinity Ward and not just the Xbox One -- the PS4 apparently has frame rate issues, the PC version doesn't run all that smoothly all things considered, etc. I'll be surprised if the next COD doesn't run more effectively on the Xbox One (and the PS4 for that matter) in 2014.,.but this is what happens when we're in the first cycle of a new gen. There are going to be mediocre releases, disappointments, etc.

 

[Mako1215]

DS4 is a little smaller then the 360 controller but the shape of it makes it more comfortable then the ds3

 

[TimboSliceGB]

DS4 is a little smaller then the 360 controller but the shape of it makes it more comfortable then the ds3

that' i would agree withthe change in shape and size has helped the ds4 but i still like the 360/x1 controller over ds4.

and yes the position of the sticks have alot to do with it.

 

[Mako1215]

I know this is obvious, but it's also worth remembering for all the talk about resolutions and everything else that we're at launch. Things are going to get better, they aren't going to get worse. From all the COD discussion, it seems the issue is as much to do with Infinity Ward and not just the Xbox One -- the PS4 apparently has frame rate issues, the PC version doesn't run all that smoothly all things considered, etc. I'll be surprised if the next COD doesn't run more effectively on the Xbox One (and the PS4 for that matter) in 2014.,.but this is what happens when we're in the first cycle of a new gen. There are going to be mediocre releases, disappointments, etc.



2 things about the COD game. They spent 4 to 6 months making the same extinction mode. They prolly spent a little bit longer with having to polish it up etc etc.

Then they even went on to say that it was the first awkward date with the new hardware. So a combo of the extinction mode, and new hardware made it not the greatest game out.

I think running at 720p was a smart move since they obviously don't quite have a grasp on the new hardware yet, and it won't run the machine as hard so hopefully framedrops don't happen.

 

[slickkill77]

Games running at native 1080p don't mean better game version at all that is just a res. story is coming out that ghost is having major issues on ps4 with lag and what not. Seems like it's very possible 1080p might be pushing ps4 to its limits. Look at rise that is so called 720 p and looks amazing . No way a 360 native 720 p game looks that good.

Might I add I played ps4 at bestbuy yesterday and ds4 did not change much. It's little bigger but still too small.

It's Ryse and it's 900p not 720p

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Ryse-Confirmed-30fps-900p-Xbox-One-60158.html

Ryse is looking like its going to be a clunker

Game Informer- Ryse: Son Of Rome Is As Fun As Dialing Phone Numbers

http://www.gameinformer.com/games/ryse_son_of_rome/b/xboxone/archive/2013/11/06/ryse-son-of-rome-is-as-fun-as-dialing-phone-numbers.aspx


I don't believe the $2 billion dollars story. That's some analyst guessing at the figure. I'm sure they are losing some money, but it would make sense that they are. Windows Phone went through heavy re-branding last year and launched WP8 in late 2012. Xbox One was being developed, exclusives were being paid for and it had to be marketed. MS bought Skype 2 years ago and that wasn't cheap. So sure the entertainment division may not be making money right now but I doubt they are losing $2 billion every year. You have to go through some growing pains to release new products. It took a while for the 360 to make money. WP8 is slowing making its way up the charts and it has even surpassed iOs in some countries. Xbox One is going to go through the same growing pains in terms of money lost

 

[DestroVega]

Yeah I never cared about gamerscore, trophies, avatars or any of that junk. I mostly just play single player games, and sell them off as soon as the credits roll. Only online gaming I've done lately is co-op like Borderlands, and my friends I play those types of games with are going PS4.

So it's always easy for me to switch my main gaming platform over generations. During the time I've been a gamer my main platforms have been: NES, SNES, N64, PS2, 360. I go with what ever hardware/exclusive game lineup matches my interests best each time, and fortunately don't have any hesitance about ditching a gamer tag etc. making it harder to switch.




And that the PS4 seems to be more powerful and running more games in 1080p vs 720-900p on X1. I'm not a videophile so I don't really care about all this resolution up roar. But it does seem like a real issue and suggests the PS4 will get the better running versions of multiplatform games this time around.

That's at launch. Numerous developers have already said the two consoles are virtually as powerful.

It's more glaring because Ghosts is probably the biggest multi-play launch title. If the next COD isn't native 1080p on both I'd be floored.

And give 90% of people a blind test on which Ghosts version is which and it wouldn't even matter.

 

[dmaul1114]

Yeah, Ghosts is a bad game to compare anyway as it just seems like a half-assed sequel all around, even on current gen stuff.

But yeah, it's definitely a matter of having to wait and see how things pan out with games that come out spring, summer and fall, rather than the rushed launch games.  I'll never buy another console at launch as you usually get one or two polished games, a bunch of crap and a long drought--and the benefit of buying when the console, games and accessories are all full price (though there are some game deals this time around with the Target B2G1 etc.).  I'd rather give it six months to a year, be able to make a more informed purchase, and at least get some cheaper games if not any price deal on the console itself.

I would say I'd disagree that developers are saying they're about the same powerwise--at least uniformly.  Several have said the PS4 has more power, the X1 has ram bottleneck issues etc.  Now maybe developers will eventually figure out how to get around it like they did the weird PS3 architecure this gen.  But only time will tell on that.  And again, I'm personally not really concerned as I'm not that into graphics etc.  If MS wants my business they need to put out a Kinectless SKU at some point, and get enough exclusives I want to play to make it worth my while over PS4--as I'm 100% only getting one machine as I just don't game enough for more than one anymore.

 

[slickkill77]

That's at launch. Numerous developers have already said the two consoles are virtually as powerful.

It's more glaring because Ghosts is probably the biggest multi-play launch title. If the next COD isn't native 1080p on both I'd be floored.

And give 90% of people a blind test on which Ghosts version is which and it wouldn't even matter.

Yea that's what I've been thinking. People make these gifs to point out the differences between the 720p/1080p games and that's all well and good, but in game are you really going to stare at the leaves on the tree and go "man I sure am glad that leaf is rendered in 1080p"? In game I bet most people wouldn't be able to tell. Do I wish all Xbox One games were 1080p/60fps? I sure do, but it's not going to stop me from enjoying them as long as they look good and run smooth.

I doubt MS is going to release a kinect less bundle ever. If they were going to they would have done it at launch or they wouldn't have included it at all. I'm sure we all wish they didn't include it, but it's too late now. The kinect and the Xbox One OS seem to be the two biggest issues holding the Xbox One back power wise. That's the idea that I keep getting from developer interviews. There is so much power reserved for those two things and MS isn't concerned with making a powerhouse graphics machine. They are more concerned with making an all around entertainment machine. Considering the lack of inspiring kinect features I wish they would have just sold kinect 2 separately. I mean the first one sold what 20 million units? I don't think the ideas that developers implement are going to be worth the extra add on cost for most people for the kinect. MS should have just implemented the voice recon features in the Xbox One box itself and sold the kinect separately for those that want it

 

[TimboSliceGB]

the biggest game that will test both systems at launch is by far bf4 and from side by side videos i have seen of this game at times the game looks better on x1 and at times better on ps4. I'n my mind both systems run bf4 pretty dang well.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

2 things about the COD game. They spent 4 to 6 months making the same extinction mode. They prolly spent a little bit longer with having to polish it up etc etc.

Then they even went on to say that it was the first awkward date with the new hardware. So a combo of the extinction mode, and new hardware made it not the greatest game out.

I think running at 720p was a smart move since they obviously don't quite have a grasp on the new hardware yet, and it won't run the machine as hard so hopefully framedrops don't happen.

it was 100 percent smart moove after hearing the issues it's having running at 1080p on ps4. I'm sorry but they did not make a true next gen engine for ghost. All they did was add some lighting effects which by the way is only diff between this gen and next gen version. With them doing 1080 P on ps4 and on pc is pretty much over pushing what the engine can really do. If activison was smart they would put cod on a two year hold to build a legit new engine but you know that will never happen.

 

[slickkill77]

Activision already announced a COD game for next year

 

[Richard Kain]

Yea that's what I've been thinking. People make these gifs to point out the differences between the 720p/1080p games and that's all well and good, but in game are you really going to stare at the leaves on the tree and go "man I sure am glad that leaf is rendered in 1080p"? In game I bet most people wouldn't be able to tell. Do I wish all Xbox One games were 1080p/60fps? I sure do, but it's not going to stop me from enjoying them as long as they look good and run smooth.

The difference in resolution is minimal enough not to matter to the general consumer. We've long since reached a point of diminishing returns on rendering fidelity. But that in itself is part of the problem.

The XBox One's price tag is still $100 steeper. When people pay more, they expect more. It's one of the things that really held the PS3 back. The third-party cross-platform development heavily favored the 360, thanks to the PS3's bizarre architecture. People had to pay more for a PS3, but often got less. Those consumers who knew enough to seek out the PS3 exclusive titles would see some of that rendering power in action. But general consumers who just wanted their cross-platform mainstream titles favored the 360. It cost less but gave a comparable, and in some cases better, experience. (I remember the 360 version of Bayonetta was noticeably better and more stable than the PS3 port)

For a time, the XBox One is going to see itself in a comparable position. It will cost more, but for some consumers it will provide less. This is part of the reason why the Kinect interface and Cable integration are going to be significant early on. They provide features that will set the XBox One apart from the competition.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

Activision already announced a COD game for next year

well hope is that the next iw game will have a legit new engine which is like two years away. We all know it's not going to happen next year seeing trayarch only takes iw engine and changes it abit to make it look like its own even if it's not.

 

[dmaul1114]

I doubt MS is going to release a kinect less bundle ever. If they were going to they would have done it at launch or they wouldn't have included it at all. I'm sure we all wish they didn't include it, but it's too late now.

It's never too late. They've already changed things so Kinect is no longer required to be on all the time, so easy patch to make everything 100% work without it.

They definitely don't want to as they want to try and force it in and hope people like it once they have it, since they care more about the media stuff and taking over the entertainment center than just being a game console.

But if it's a year+ down the road and they're lagging way behind Sony in sales, you can bet they'll re-assess they're strategy. And putting out a Kinect-less SKU that they can price the same or less than PS4 would be the obvious move to re-gain momentum.

If that doesn't happen, and they're staying competitive with Sony in sales, then yeah, we'll never see a Kinect-less SKU. And so be it, I'll go with PS4 or skip consoles and finally build a gaming PC.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

The difference in resolution is minimal enough not to matter to the general consumer. We've long since reached a point of diminishing returns on rendering fidelity. But that in itself is part of the problem.

The XBox One's price tag is still $100 steeper. When people pay more, they expect more. It's one of the things that really held the PS3 back. The third-party cross-platform development heavily favored the 360, thanks to the PS3's bizarre architecture. People had to pay more for a PS3, but often got less. Those consumers who knew enough to seek out the PS3 exclusive titles would see some of that rendering power in action. But general consumers who just wanted their cross-platform mainstream titles favored the 360. It cost less but gave a comparable, and in some cases better, experience. (I remember the 360 version of Bayonetta was noticeably better and more stable than the PS3 port)

For a time, the XBox One is going to see itself in a comparable position. It will cost more, but for some consumers it will provide less. This is part of the reason why the Kinect interface and Cable integration are going to be significant early on. They provide features that will set the XBox One apart from the competition.

most people that buy xbox one after launch will not even know what the diff of 1080p/720 p is. forza runs at 1080 p so we know it's possible for x1 to run games at that level. At this point in video game industry it's all about name brands. Come next spring when these things should be on shelf more ofton people that will be buying it will be like oh man the new xbox i must have it to play with my xbox friends. Same goes for ps4 also name brand is everything after you get past the launch.

might i add i doudt xbox one games will list 720 p on the game box seeing all are upscaled to 1080 p good chance they will only list 1080p.

 

[Richard Kain]

might i add i doudt xbox one games will list 720 p on the game box seeing all are upscaled to 1080 p good chance they will only list 1080p.

I'm not sure why you're even still arguing about resolutions. I already conceded that point. I was just highlighting that the lack of perceptible difference doesn't work in Microsoft's favor, because they are charging more for their console.

You are right about the branding. But Microsoft's bone-headed moves earlier in the year have hurt their branding, especially among early adopters. Meanwhile Sony's branding for the PS4 is fairly strong. They aren't flubbing things the same way they did with the advertising for the PS3. (which was at times both bizarre and disturbing)

The competition between the two is fairly even, but Sony is going to enjoy the $100 price difference for the majority of 2014. Microsoft needs to establish through it's branding that the two systems AREN'T equal. They need to establish in the minds of consumers that the XBox One is easily worth $100 more. For the XBox faithful who are already invested in the Live ecosystem, that is easy. But for the rest of the potential consumers it is going to be an uphill battle. And the more that Sony is able to establish the PS4 as a viable alternative, the harder it will be.

 

[blueweltall]

I'm not sure why you're even still arguing about resolutions. I already conceded that point. I was just highlighting that the lack of perceptible difference doesn't work in Microsoft's favor, because they are charging more for their console.

You are right about the branding. But Microsoft's bone-headed moves earlier in the year have hurt their branding, especially among early adopters. Meanwhile Sony's branding for the PS4 is fairly strong. They aren't flubbing things the same way they did with the advertising for the PS3. (which was at times both bizarre and disturbing)

The competition between the two is fairly even, but Sony is going to enjoy the $100 price difference for the majority of 2014. Microsoft needs to establish through it's branding that the two systems AREN'T equal. They need to establish in the minds of consumers that the XBox One is easily worth $100 more. For the XBox faithful who are already invested in the Live ecosystem, that is easy. But for the rest of the potential consumers it is going to be an uphill battle. And the more that Sony is able to establish the PS4 as a viable alternative, the harder it will be.

Yeah he keeps mentioning resolution does not matter but brings it up all the time. Denial?

 

[TimboSliceGB]

titan fall will help x1 in sales next year and as long as x1 is the so called system to play cod on will help also. All the ads i see of ghost and even bf4 ends with xbox one logo. I do agree that come next year it's a must ms does something to make the extra 100 bucks worth it like toss in a free game or do a kinect less bundle for 400.

 

[DestroVega]

Let's be honest. People don't care about a Kinect-less SKU. They just don't want to pay $100 more than a PS4 because of Kinect being boxed in.

If they were the same price no one would say anything.

 

[Richard Kain]

If they were the same price no one would say anything.

If they were the same price Microsoft would have the advantage. They could legitimately claim that the XBox One comes with a free camera peripheral. And Microsoft would adjust their marketing to play up that disparity.

Microsoft could still swing this to their advantage. While cheaper consoles have traditionally had an edge, especially early on, that isn't the end-all-be-all. Microsoft needs a little of the lightning-in-a-bottle that the original Wii benefited from. And that could come from the Kinect 2.0. I just worry that they still don't know how to properly advertise it, position it, or develop for it.

There's also the issue of dropping the original Kinect. The 360 still has legs, and is going to sell strong this holiday season. Focusing on development for the Kinect 2.0 could cannibalize development for the original Kinect. Dropping support for the original Kinect could end up being a mistake.

 

[dmaul1114]

Let's be honest. People don't care about a Kinect-less SKU. They just don't want to pay $100 more than a PS4 because of Kinect being boxed in.

If they were the same price no one would say anything.

For sure.

People like me that loathe motion/voice control stuff and will never buy a console that forces it in (and quit gaming if they become standard) due to not wanting to financially support that trend are a minority. Most would just ignore it and not buy Kinect games if they didn't like it if price wasn't a factor.

If price was the same, it would be as Richard Kain said--and advantage MS could tout due to having the camera and the PS4 not for the same price. Though I'd imagine Sony would have just packed in the Eye camera if MS was launching the X1 at $400, and hadn't gotten a backlash over forcing in Kinect.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

lets say x1 was 400 and sony packed in their cam kinect 2.0 is still giant leap in tech compared to ps cam so ms would still have the edge they could profit from. 

 

[Richard Kain]

lets say x1 was 400 and sony packed in their cam kinect 2.0 is still giant leap in tech compared to ps cam so ms would still have the edge they could profit from.

As has already been pointed out, a giant leap in tech is not nearly enough to provide a marketing advantage. Perception is more important than technical capability.

It doesn't matter how much more powerful and feature-rich the Kinect 2.0 is than the Playstation Eye. What matters is how feature-rich it is perceived to be by the consumers.

One of the really telling points for the XBox One is going to be the Kinect-enhanced interface. It needs to work. It needs to work smoothly. If Microsoft can pull that off, it will be a major selling point that they can at least get word-of-mouth from. (it's a feature that isn't going to play nice with retail demo units) Having the Kinect 2.0 packed in allows them to really push the interface integration. If people can command their XBox One Star-Trek style that is going to be a significant selling point.

 

[dmaul1114]

Maybe.  I think a vast majority of console buyers just don't give a shit about camera games.

They appeal to families as it's something fun to do with the crib midgets, but a lot of those folks are fine with Wii Sports still.  And they appeal to people too lazy to go outside and run or join a gym who want to do some half-assed exercise game routine (and Wii Fit already has a lot of that market, and maybe Wii Fit U will catch on with that crowd too--time will tell).  About the only  other appeal is to people who like Dance games etc. themselves or for parties.

So I just don't see the Kinect or Eye being any big selling point period.  Even MS isn't really touting that stuff as much as the voice commands for navigating the home theater--and that could have been done with just a microphone on the front of the console.

I've seen nothing, and doubt I'll ever see anything, where camera/motion control is of benefit to a regular gamer like me who just wants to play FPS, RPG and other traditional game genres.  Something like the Wii U tablet controller honestly has more potential as at least that can be used for having a map up all the time, easier inventory management etc.  As much as I've crapped on the Wii U, it's getting more tempting as more games come out--and the Mario/Luigi bundle is a decent value--especially if it hits $250 again....

 

[kcobra22]

And they appeal to people too lazy to go outside and run or join a gym who want to do some half-assed exercise game routine

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPyjvfLZdF8

 

[DestroVega]

Yeah the new xbox fitness stuff is hardcore. Too bad it's only free for the first year or whatever.

 

[dmaul1114]

So the routines aren't half-assed, but I've never known anyone to do any at home routines (be it games, videos etc.) make any real progress long-term as it's too easy to give up, not finish the workout etc. vs. going to a gym and having the trainer keeping you going etc.

Running is often the same way, people need to join running groups, sign up for races etc.  Few have the self motivation to stick with it on their own.

So whatever.  I'm pretty snobby about excercise as I see too many lazy fat s wasting time and money on gimmick fitness routines, diets etc. vs. just making the real needed complete lifestyle change to be healthy.  And I have zero respect for people who don't take care of themselves.  If I can do it with my busy and successful career, full social calendar etc., anyone can.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

Kinect is not all about gaming. If ms made kinect only for gaming it would not be packaged on with system. Voice control is the new so called in thing heck cable company's now have voice controlled cable boxes.

 

[dmaul1114]

Kinect is not all about gaming. If ms made kinect only for gaming it would not be packaged on with system. Voice control is the new so called in thing heck cable company's now have voice controlled cable boxes.

And both I and Richard noted that.

It's a gamble on their part. They're priced a $100 higher for a feature gamers mostly don't care about, in the hopes that more casual gamers will love using it for their media stuff and that will drive sales and make them tons of money off ads.

If it works, it's a huge coup for them. If it doesn't, sales may lag and they'll find themselves in a big hole like Sony did when they launched priced higher due to forcing Bluray into the PS3.

 

[Richard Kain]

While there is plenty of potential in camera-based games, I also see far more untapped potential in the microphone. Using voice recognition to replace typing could make internet browsing on the XBox One exceptionally smooth. I also would LOVE to see a new Jeopardy game designed around the Kinect 2.0. It's the perfect application for this technology, why hasn't it already been announced?

But as I already pointed out, it needs to work. And human nature and diversity makes that a steep hurdle. All of the accents and various languages that would need to be taken into account? Proper voice interfaces have massive potential, but there are also massive challenges to surmount. And it is a very difficult feature to demonstrate. It's the kind of thing that you don't get a sense of until you try it yourself, in your own home. That's why word-of-mouth is going to be so important to the XBox One. If they DO get the interface working like they want it to, early adopters are going to be their best hope of advertising and promoting the system. People bringing their XBox One's to Thanksgiving to show them off to their extended family will be the best salesmen that Microsoft could hope for. When grandmother can switch the XBox One on just by telling it to, and then navigate to her favorite soap-opera with nothing but her voice, that is going to sell XBox One's.

 

[Reaggo]

I think I looked at the actual launch Line Up for the very first time today and just wasn't very impressed...  Though Titanfall looks sooo good

 

[DestroVega]

So the routines aren't half-assed, but I've never known anyone to do any at home routines (be it games, videos etc.) make any real progress long-term as it's too easy to give up, not finish the workout etc. vs. going to a gym and having the trainer keeping you going etc.

Running is often the same way, people need to join running groups, sign up for races etc. Few have the self motivation to stick with it on their own.

So whatever. I'm pretty snobby about excercise as I see too many lazy fat s wasting time and money on gimmick fitness routines, diets etc. vs. just making the real needed complete lifestyle change to be healthy. And I have zero respect for people who don't take care of themselves. If I can do it with my busy and successful career, full social calendar etc., anyone can.

I know numerous people who have done Insanity in their home and have had amazing results. It's probably one of the most grueling workout routines you can do along with P90X.

Obviously you need to stick to it, but that's with any exercise program.

 

[el swordo]

My thoughts? I'll get one a year from now when halo comes out.  Until then there is practically no reason to own one.  

 

[slickkill77]

Let's be honest. People don't care about a Kinect-less SKU. They just don't want to pay $100 more than a PS4 because of Kinect being boxed in.

If they were the same price no one would say anything.

Well yea but the kinect is the reason for the $100 extra price tag. So a kinect-less bundle would in theory be $100. So they go hand in hand. MS is really just wasting peoples space and money. So that's why people want kinect-less bundles.

I think the best compromise for MS would have been to stick voice controls in the actual Xbox One and priced it at $399 or $449. Then make the kinect either $99 with a game or $50 without one. That way we don't have to pay for something we don't want, we still get the cool voice controls and people will still buy the kinect. Like I said earlier, I just do not see the kinect making a big enough impact in games for most people to care. That's the whole reason MS included them. They didn't want a situation like they had last generation where some 360's had hdd's and others didn't. They figured if everyone has kinect then developers will be more inclined to make features for it. Until I'm doing Minority Report esque things with it I simply see it as a waste of money (Not that I'm really paying anything out of pocket for my X1 thanks to Swagbucks/Bing/Amazon)

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/kinect-sales-reach-24-million/1100-6403766/

24 million kinect 1.0 sold by Feb 2013

http://www.techspot.com/news/53724-microsoft-vp-claims-xbox-one-will-never-be-sold-without-kinect.html

Xbox One will never be sold without kinect

 

[SoraGamer1337]

I have already bought the PS3 but I'm going to buy Xbox One since I'm looking forward to the next Halo.

 

[phantomfriar2002]

well hope is that the next iw game will have a legit new engine which is like two years away. We all know it's not going to happen next year seeing trayarch only takes iw engine and changes it abit to make it look like its own even if it's not.

Treyarch's COD games have been IMO markedly better than IW's for several installments running now. So the prospects of them handling next year's game at least means we should see a more polished entry if nothing else. Frankly I'd rather see them handle a drastic overhaul -- assuming we actually get one -- considering that IW isn't what it used to be.

Either way, as said before, I'll be surprised if both consoles aren't running the next COD in 1080...just having more time with the new hardware will be a help.

 

[Sinfulfate]

Well yea but the kinect is the reason for the $100 extra price tag. So a kinect-less bundle would in theory be $100. So they go hand in hand. MS is really just wasting peoples space and money. So that's why people want kinect-less bundles.

I think the best compromise for MS would have been to stick voice controls in the actual Xbox One and priced it at $399 or $449. Then make the kinect either $99 with a game or $50 without one. That way we don't have to pay for something we don't want, we still get the cool voice controls and people will still buy the kinect. Like I said earlier, I just do not see the kinect making a big enough impact in games for most people to care. That's the whole reason MS included them. They didn't want a situation like they had last generation where some 360's had hdd's and others didn't. They figured if everyone has kinect then developers will be more inclined to make features for it. Until I'm doing Minority Report esque things with it I simply see it as a waste of money (Not that I'm really paying anything out of pocket for my X1 thanks to Swagbucks/Bing/Amazon)

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/kinect-sales-reach-24-million/1100-6403766/

24 million kinect 1.0 sold by Feb 2013

http://www.techspot.com/news/53724-microsoft-vp-claims-xbox-one-will-never-be-sold-without-kinect.html

Xbox One will never be sold without kinect

I don't see how Microsoft is wasting people's money and space by having the kinect bundled in. Microsoft built the Xbox One around kinect so if someone buys one with the intent to never use the kinect features then that's the buyers loss not Microsoft's.

Microsoft doesn't need to compromise at all with the price. Microsoft knows what matters most is the experience and as long as the experience is great price wont matter to an extent. Microsoft followed this approach with the Xbox/Xbox 360 being the only platforms to charge for online play and we all know how that worked out for them.

 

[slickkill77]

What kinect features are so great that it would make people want to buy it though? The voice stuff? Hand gestures? Motion controls? Nothing in there is a game changer. So yes it is a waste of money and console power. People bought kinect one on there own. But even then it was only 20 million people out of what 80 million consoles sold. That's only 1/5 of people. Clearly the Kinect is not in great demand. Its popular but it's not something people asked for. MS did what they wanted this gen and how did that work out for them? They got a giant sh*t storm from the internet over almost every feature. 

 

[el swordo]

Question do gamertags ever expire? I sold my xbox probably 3 months and started a checking account to put money aside for xbone and wondering if my gamertag will still be there when I pick one up when halo comes out.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

What kinect features are so great that it would make people want to buy it though? The voice stuff? Hand gestures? Motion controls? Nothing in there is a game changer. So yes it is a waste of money and console power. People bought kinect one on there own. But even then it was only 20 million people out of what 80 million consoles sold. That's only 1/5 of people. Clearly the Kinect is not in great demand. Its popular but it's not something people asked for. MS did what they wanted this gen and how did that work out for them. They got a giant sh*t storm from the internet over almost every feature.

i know alot of people that purchased a 360 for the entertainment purpose they are causal gamers. They use kinect mostly for non gaming stuff like voice control entertainment apps. But i say that at 500 bucks even 400 with ps4 i don't see many causal gamers buying either system till we see a decent price drop.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

Question do gamertags ever expire? I sold my xbox probably 3 months and started a checking account to put money aside for xbone and wondering if my gamertag will still be there when I pick one up when halo comes out.

nope

 

[Monsta Mack]

Even if the systems are the same price with Kinect people would still either bitch about

A) The system being not as powerful as the PS4

or

B) Should be even cheaper then the PS4 with Kinect... because, you know, It's not as powerful.

I'm 110% sure MS will drop the price on the system if systems don't sell out come the summer/fall still. I don't see MS dropping the price at all unless it ends up like the Wii U, which It won't because the Xbox is a strong brand, at least in the US. The Wii was a gimmick/fad and Wii U sales have proven that. I'm confident that the XB1 will take 2nd place this gen and destroy Wii U and Vita sales (as if theres any doubt of them destroying Vita sales, then I have lost all faith in this world.)

 

[Sinfulfate]

What kinect features are so great that it would make people want to buy it though? The voice stuff? Hand gestures? Motion controls? Nothing in there is a game changer. So yes it is a waste of money and console power. People bought kinect one on there own. But even then it was only 20 million people out of what 80 million consoles sold. That's only 1/5 of people. Clearly the Kinect is not in great demand. Its popular but it's not something people asked for. MS did what they wanted this gen and how did that work out for them. They got a giant sh*t storm from the internet over almost every feature.

I don't think anyone is buying a Xbox One for the kinect but like I said the kinect is only a waste if the user decides not to use it. There might be nothing game changing about the kinect but why would that matter? I agree that no one asked for kinect but MS clearly wants to make sure every Xbox One owner has one and that makes a lot sense. Peripherals really cant reach their full potential if they don't have a sizable install.

Microsoft will be fine. The Internet always gets upset when any of these companies don't do exactly what they want them to do but in the end none of this internet "shit storm" will matter and Microsoft knows that.

 

[8bitArtist]

but in the end none of this internet "shit storm" will matter and Microsoft knows that.

if it didnt matter, they wouldnt have changed all their policies they had in place at launch.

 

[dmaul1114]

I don't think anyone is buying a Xbox One for the kinect but like I said the kinect is only a waste if the user decides not to use it. There might be nothing game changing about the kinect but why would that matter?

It matters because:

It forces me to financially support motion and voice controls (trends I don't want to become standard) if I want to buy an X1 for the exclusive games.

It's a big ugly box I have to find a way to cram into my HT set up. Moot since I'd have it off and just chuck it behind the stand somewhere since it has to be plugged in. But still an annoyance.

It adds $100 to the price for a peripheral that I'd never use.

I mean all that is fine, as it's clear I'm not the type of user MS is going after, and there's the PS4 and PC gaming out there that's more catered to someone like me who just wants to play traditional games, with traditional controls and not be hassled with peripherals we won't use.

if it didnt matter, they wouldnt have changed all their policies they had in place at launch.

Exactly. The hardcore matter for reasons the article we discussed months back noted. The hardcore buy first and they influence which console their softcore friends (who are the biggest chunk of the game buying market) end up getting, as the softcores play consoles at their more hardcore friends houses, want to get that console so they can play games online with them etc.

The internet was in uproar over the PS3 including Bluray and driving up price over 360 and Wii, and over Sony's botched PR about it ("get a second job"). As well as the perception noted above of being more expensive and less powerful for gaming due to multiplatform titles not running as well due to it's wonky architecture. That caused them to lose a HUGE lead they had in worldwide sales with the PS2. They're recently gotten back on top in worldwide sales, but still lag way behind 360 in the US.

Now the tables are more or less flipped. MS has the more expensive hardware with a feature a lot of gamers don't want (and it isn't likely to become more useful like Bluray did as more gamers got HDTVs and prices fell), terrible PR with the DRM, flipflops and misinformation put out, and perceived as less powerful despite being more expensive due to worse performance for mulitplats at launch.

So it's hard to see MS staying on top. They may eek out a close sales victory in the US since the CoD/Madden crowd that played those games on 360 will likely stay there to keep their XBL accounts and friends/clans. But I see them in a pretty distant second place worldwide when all is said and done.

 

[Erad30]

Xbox, can you hear me now? One requires repetition


By DERRIK J. LANG 32 minutes ago

•  
•  
•  
•  

•  
•  
•  

.
View gallery

• 
  
  .
• 
  
  .
• 
  
  .
• 
  
  .

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Like a stubborn family member or insubordinate employee, Xbox One owners might need to tell their fancy new console what to do more than once.




 


In flashy commercials that began airing last week to promote Microsoft's upcoming video game system, an array of users verbally command their Xbox Ones to do stuff like answer a Skype call, fire up a "Titanfall" match or play the latest "Star Trek" film. The ads leave out one detail: They probably had to repeat themselves a couple of times for it to work.

At a demonstration of the Xbox One this week organized by Microsoft, the new version of the company's voice-and-motion-detecting Kinect sensor didn't work nearly as flawlessly in real life. The Xbox 360 successor, which is scheduled for release Nov. 22, required several commands to be repeated for the response to pop up on screen.

During a private 45-minute presentation showcasing the console's media and entertainment capabilities, about 10 of 45 voice commands issued had to be repeated by a Microsoft spokesman — some as many as four times. Kinect didn't immediately detect such orders as "Xbox, watch ESPN" and "Xbox, Bing movies with Sandra Bullock" during the demo.

"Everything you're seeing here is going to get better," promised Jose Pinero, senior director of marketing and public relations for Xbox, at the conclusion of Wednesday's demo. "Right now, we're still a couple of weeks away but voice, the more you use it and the more the system learns, the more accurate it becomes. We're still working on fit and finish."

When the company unveiled the Xbox One at its Redmond, Wash., headquarters last May, Microsoft hyped the machine not as a super-powered gaming console but as an all-in-one entertainment solution for living rooms that would allow users to easily switch between — and snap together — activities on a TV screen, without needing to mash buttons.


View gallery."

This photo released by Microsoft shows the Xbox One user interface from Microsoft. The successor to  …

The previous Kinect sensor was equally billed as a game changer when it debuted in 2010 but was considered by many gamers to ultimately be a gimmick.

Unlike the last Kinect, Microsoft is including the new sensor with each Xbox One system, which will cost $499. The updated version of the camera has a field of vision that's 60 percent wider than Kinect for Xbox 360. It can also detect more bodies, as well as heart rates and facial expressions.

Sony Corp. will similarly release an updated PlayStation Camera when its PlayStation 4 debuts a week ahead of the Xbox One, but that sensor is optional for the PS4, which cost $100 less than the Xbox One.

"Microsoft got so intoxicated by the first generation of Kinect that I think they're just assuming people are still really excited about Kinect," said James McQuivey, Forrester Research analyst and author of "Digital Disruption: Unleashing the Next Wave of Innovation."

McQuivey said because Microsoft has turned its attention to other audiences besides just gamers, they could potentially sell half as many Xbox Ones as they did Xbox 360s over the next-gen console's lifetime, especially if the system doesn't work as advertised.


View gallery."

FILE - This Aug. 28, 2013 file photo, the Microsoft Xbox One console is on display at the GameStop E …

While the Xbox One's voice detection did not function properly during Wednesday's demo, other Xbox One features operated without fault. Graphically, the slick Xbox One interface was able to almost seamlessly switch between such features as playing "Forza Motorsport 5," watching a live episode of "Let's Make a Deal" and viewing a channel guide.

Microsoft calls its listings OneGuide, and users can curate which TV channels and media apps appear — and in what order. The Xbox One can play live TV and provide listings if hooked up to a TV receiver, but it can't act as a TV recording device, although the Xbox One can record and upload footage captured from games and with the Kinect sensor.

Microsoft announced Friday that streaming content apps like Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Instant Video, VUDU and Crackle would be among the first batch coming to the console before spring 2014. Others bringing apps to Xbox One include the networks ESPN, Univision, Fox, CW and HBO, as well as the NFL.

___

Online:

http://www.xbox.com

___

Follow AP Entertainment Writer Derrik J. Lang on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/derrikjlang.

 

[crunchewy]

Do we know if the X1 controller will work on a 360 too? How about PC? If it works on both of those then I will probably buy one even though no X1 in my near future. I really want the improved d-pad mostly.

Regarding Kinect 2.0. One thing that would make me buy an X1 is Dance Central 4. Unfortunately nothing has been said about it and it might be replaced by "Disney Experience". DC4 was what made Kinect have a purpose and made it worth it (for those of us that like dance games). So disappointing to see it discontinued, even if only temporarily. It should have been a launch title.

 

[crunchewy]

Regarding Kinect 2.0. One thing that would make me buy an X1 is Dance Central 4. Unfortunately nothing has been said about it and it might be replaced by "Disney Experience". DC4 was what made Kinect have a purpose and made it worth it (for those of us that like dance games). So disappointing to see it discontinued, even if only temporarily. It should have been a launch title.

 

[Sinfulfate]

if it didnt matter, they wouldnt have changed all their policies they had in place at launch.

That was a different situation. Microsoft doesn't change their policies based on what people on the internet complain about. If that was the case Xbox live gold would be free and you wouldn't need to pay for live to use netflix. I dont work for Microsoft so I can't say for sure what made them change their policies but If I had to guess I'd say it was because they weren't ready for it. As soon as they can figure out trade ins, rentals, and stuff like that, the DRM stuff will be back I guarantee it.

It matters because:

It forces me to financially support motion and voice controls (trends I don't want to become standard) if I want to buy an X1 for the exclusive games.

It's a big ugly box I have to find a way to cram into my HT set up. Moot since I'd have it off and just chuck it behind the stand somewhere since it has to be plugged in. But still an annoyance.

It adds $100 to the price for a peripheral that I'd never use.

I mean all that is fine, as it's clear I'm not the type of user MS is going after, and there's the PS4 and PC gaming out there that's more catered to someone like me who just wants to play traditional games, with traditional controls and not be hassled with peripherals we won't use.

Exactly. The hardcore matter for reasons the article we discussed months back noted. The hardcore buy first and they influence which console their softcore friends (who are the biggest chunk of the game buying market) end up getting, as the softcores play consoles at their more hardcore friends houses, want to get that console so they can play games online with them etc.

The internet was in uproar over the PS3 including Bluray and driving up price over 360 and Wii, and over Sony's botched PR about it ("get a second job"). As well as the perception noted above of being more expensive and less powerful for gaming due to multiplatform titles not running as well due to it's wonky architecture. That caused them to lose a HUGE lead they had in worldwide sales with the PS2. They're recently gotten back on top in worldwide sales, but still lag way behind 360 in the US.

Now the tables are more or less flipped. MS has the more expensive hardware with a feature a lot of gamers don't want (and it isn't likely to become more useful like Bluray did as more gamers got HDTVs and prices fell), terrible PR with the DRM, flipflops and misinformation put out, and perceived as less powerful despite being more expensive due to worse performance for mulitplats at launch.

So it's hard to see MS staying on top. They may eek out a close sales victory in the US since the CoD/Madden crowd that played those games on 360 will likely stay there to keep their XBL accounts and friends/clans. But I see them in a pretty distant second place worldwide when all is said and done.

Of course the hardcore matter but nothing Microsoft has done has upset the hardcore. Hardcore gamers are people like me who want to play the latest and greatest games. We dont care about which console sells the most, if we need to use kinect, if the PS4 supports mp3s, if we need to use friend codes or whatever. If a console has a game we want to play we will buy the console to play that game.