Xbox One - General Discussion (NO DISCUSSION REGARDING PS4 - MOD WARNING Post 6903)

cursai

Anybody else having trouble with the Gamespot Stream. Watchdogs + interview was scheduled for now but its switched on the schedule?

Stylesclash07

I'm a Xbox fanboy but will most likely get the ps4 first. But I am loving the controller I think it will be the best controller you get in the box with a console this gen. The Xbox family thing where you can share the game with ten people on your xbox family that sounds interesting

Pushtrak

Have yet to read this, but here it is: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/hands-on-with-the-xbox-one-a-mixed-start-with-some-interesting-games/

Stone Deaf 4evr

I like the controller, the user interface, and I like how much microsoft refined the whole dashboard throughout the lifespan of the 360. Id be hopeful to see that carry on for the xbox one. regardless of what people think of kinect, the idea of swiping your hands to activate menus and search etc appeals to me.

I was die hard to get one on day one. but now I'm on the fence. I really really really want more information.

Rascasse

wnolan1992 wrote: »

But the point is, why do we have to continually check in? It's like MS assume we're all pirating scum unless we say "Hey MS, aren't I being such a good boy? Here, I'm checking in! Can I play this machine I paid €500 for now please?"

My phone doesn't have a hotspot feature, what do I do to check in?

Just to play devils advocate, there is an element of quid pro quo in having to check in. For example, all your games will be stored in the cloud so if you visit a friend that has the XB1 and you want to play one of your games you can, or if you scratch a disk it doesn't matter.

Also, Sony have said the no DRM only applies to first party games. Third party devs can stick in any DRM method that they want, potentially more restrictive than MS's system.

FlyingIrishMan

Rascasse wrote: »

Just to play devils advocate, there is an element of quid pro quo in having to check in. For example, all your games will be stored in the cloud so if you visit a friend that has the XB1 and you want to play one of your games you can, or if you scratch a disk it doesn't matter.

Also, Sony have said the no DRM only applies to first party games. Third party devs can stick in any DRM method that they want, potentially more restrictive than MS's system.

Sony's DRM system is the exact same as it is on PS3/360.
Publishers have the ability to add all the DRM they want in a game now, but they don't, so its not likely they will start next gen on PS4.

top madra

bk wrote: »

Fair enough PhlegmyMoses, the MS "fanboyism" I see might be more on international forums, in particular US ones where the Xbox is much more popular.

On other forums I'm seeing crazy people trying to justify MS's actions with the X1 saying things like "sure I never buy second hand games", "I never share games with friends", etc.

BTW I think the backwards compatibility of the PS3 benefited it much more then the 360. There was a massive number of PS2 owners, but relatively few Xbox owners in comparison. So it was an important point in it's favour.

I never share games or trade them in, if I want a new game I'll buy it.....Just saying.

You can still play some games from the previous Xbox on the 360 but it just doesn't happen because after you go back to a previous Gen machine you are usually disappointed by the graphics after a few mins.

I still have a lot of my old consoles and apart from the nostalgia factor of Duck Hunt and that laughing dog they never get used and most probably just keep gathering dust.

cursai wrote: »

Sounds great but. I dont use the xbox all that much. Only have it three yrs approx. And the last subscription automatically renewed so couldnt help that. Do remember getting a free month off some game though. Have a couple of two day sub codes on paper somewhere.

For somebody that barely uses it you sure have a lot of opinions on it.

A lot of people on here are bashing the chit out of MS and it seems if we all don't agree that Sony is king there's something wrong with us, well I have my first Xbox since 2006 and apart from upgrading the memory it has never gave me a problem.

I have spent thousands of hours playing games and never minded paying the extra for LIVE because it was a much superior service to PSN and anybody that try's to say different does not play with friends online much.

The ease of using MS LIVE and chatting with friends in parties that are playing different games is just something PS players have not enjoyed yet and have no clue about.

LIVE and the Xbox controller are the two main reasons I won't make my mind up just yet. I've got a feeling this is getting blown out of proportion.

Just for the record I have a PS3, Alienware laptop and a custom built PC and the Xbox is by the far the easiest and most enjoyable way to play with friends.

The PC tops it for graphics and 64 players in BF3, but that's it.

Rascasse

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

Sony's DRM system is the exact same as it is on PS3/360.
Publishers have the ability to add all the DRM they want in a game now, but they don't, so its not likely they will start next gen on PS4.

There are plenty of ways around that. E.g What's to stop devs selling the bare bones of the game with the rest as one time DLC? So you buy FIFA or F1 and you get a couple of teams and the rest is one time DLC.

Devs must be backing MS for them to attempt it, be it through some kind of DRM, higher price for PS games, or exclusivity periods. If MS don't have something it'll be a disaster.

FlyingIrishMan

Rascasse wrote: »

There are plenty of ways around that. E.g What's to stop devs selling the bare bones of the game with the rest as one time DLC? So you buy FIFA or F1 and you get a couple of teams and the rest is one time DLC.

Devs must be backing MS for them to attempt it, be it through some kind of DRM, higher price for PS games, or exclusivity periods. If MS don't have something it'll be a disaster.

Whats stopping them from doing it now this gen? You're assuming because MS has enforced mandatory DRM on their system that publishers will just add it to PS4.

The rumours from neogaf are saying that MS are the one who pushed for this DRM, not publishers.

Rascasse

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

Whats stopping them from doing it now this gen? You're assuming because MS has enforced mandatory DRM on their system that publishers will just add it to PS4.

The rumours from neogaf are saying that MS are the one who pushed for this DRM, not publishers.

It makes sense if you are going to change the paradigm to do with a new product.

I agree, I am very much assuming that publishers will add (or remove) something to (from) the PS4 (be it DRM, price or exclusivity) as I find it hard to believe that MS would make such a screw up. There is still 4 or 5 months till these hit the shelves and I'm sure we'll learn a lot more in the next few months about what each is offering (we've already had Sony rowing back on their DRM-free claim today).

FlyingIrishMan

Rascasse wrote: »

It makes sense if you are going to change the paradigm to do with a new product.

I agree, I am very much assuming that publishers will add (or remove) something to (from) the PS4 (be it DRM, price or exclusivity) as I find it hard to believe that MS would make such a screw up. There is still 4 or 5 months till these hit the shelves and I'm sure we'll learn a lot more in the next few months about what each is offering (we've already had Sony rowing back on their DRM-free claim today).

Sony hasn't rowed back on their DRM claim. Thats what I've been trying to explain to you.
DRM on PS4 will be the exact same as it is on PS3/360. Developers have the option to build DRM measures into their games, but DRM measures will not be built into the console.

evolutionqy7

Some good reading about how Kinect will integrate with games.


http://mobile.theverge.com/2013/6/11/4420610/xbox-one-kinect-trades-gimmicks-for-true-interactivity

beno619

top madra wrote: »

I never share games or trade them in, if I want a new game I'll buy it.....Just saying.

You can still play some games from the previous Xbox on the 360 but it just doesn't happen because after you go back to a previous Gen machine you are usually disappointed by the graphics after a few mins.

I still have a lot of my old consoles and apart from the nostalgia factor of Duck Hunt and that laughing dog they never get used and most probably just keep gathering dust.




For somebody that barely uses it you sure have a lot of opinions on it.

A lot of people on here are bashing the chit out of MS and it seems if we all don't agree that Sony is king there's something wrong with us, well I have my first Xbox since 2006 and apart from upgrading the memory it has never gave me a problem.

I have spent thousands of hours playing games and never minded paying the extra for LIVE because it was a much superior service to PSN and anybody that try's to say different does not play with friends online much.

The ease of using MS LIVE and chatting with friends in parties that are playing different games is just something PS players have not enjoyed yet and have no clue about.

LIVE and the Xbox controller are the two main reasons I won't make my mind up just yet. I've got a feeling this is getting blown out of proportion.

Just for the record I have a PS3, Alienware laptop and a custom built PC and the Xbox is by the far the easiest and most enjoyable way to play with friends.

The PC tops it for graphics and 64 players in BF3, but that's it.

I agree with what you say about live and the 360 controller.

But the criticism has been aimed at the Xbox One, not the 360 which was definitely the better platform this gen.

On paper what Sony are offering will be better than live subscription next gen.

Havnt played my 360 in months because I'm on work placement a gold subscription becomes incredibly poor value when you only have 3 hours a week to play.

Richard Dower

FutureGuy wrote: »

Ok that's enough Richard. I have had enough of you and your clear Microsoft-bias. I've been keeping an eye on you in the weeks leading up to E3 and don't think for a second that you can get away with such posts if you post sensibly most of the time.

You are clearly a Playstation fan. Nothing wrong with that. You clearly do not like X1. Nothing wrong with that.

But you have clocked enough of, what I perceive to be, petty jabs at MS over the last while to force me to put you on notice. If you have a point to make, do so with constructive criticism or points to back it up. Starting thread to complain about a correct marketing move is silly.

Also, do not refer to Microsoft as "m$" on this forum.

Are we clear?

I see you havent issued warnings to the other trolls and blatant Sony fanboys or MS haters here, but you single me out........

maximoose

Richard Dower wrote: »

I see you havent issued warnings to the other trolls and blatant Sony fanboys or MS haters here, but you single me out........

You're the most consistent. And it's good you admit it

Nolars

Xbox one + 1 game 249.99 when you trade in a 250gb xbox 360 slim + 4 select games - Gamestop.

AirDemon

Nolimits wrote: »

I'm going to miss the xbox controller, would be great if a third party made a Playstation controller shaped like the xbox though I don't know if this is possible.

There is one that I know of that I've been considering buying myself, the PowerA Pro Elite for PS3.

Just search for "PowerA Pro Elite Wireless Controller (PS3)" on amazon and you should find it.

FutureGuy

Richard Dower wrote: »

I see you havent issued warnings to the other trolls and blatant Sony fanboys or MS haters here, but you single me out........

Singling you out? No one is giving any real trouble apart from you. You must think I'm a fool.

1 week ban from xbox for questioning moderating decisions on Xbox and insinuating that I am biased against you for some reason. If you want to participate constructively upon your return, feel free to do so. You just admitted you are a troll so will be watching you like a hawk from now on.

H3llR4iser

drumswan wrote: »

Eh, everybody understands that?!? I bought the right to use Super Mario Brothers 3 in 1990, I can still use it today. I dont have to check with Nintendo every 24 hours for ever and ever and ever if its OK with them that I still use it - that would be absurd, and frankly I wouldnt have bought it at all if that was the case. Just like I wont buy this.

I dont see why you would find that difficult to understand? Its totally changed the relationship between the gamer and his game library.

You understand the concept, I have no doubt about it, but judging from the outcry on the internet, the wast majority of people don't - all they are concerned with seems to be the fact they might not be able to resell their games, an operation which has been kind of tolerated until now, is nice to take advantage of from the cosnumer's point of view (I already spoke about enjoying second-hand games myself), but is definitely not a right.

As for playing Super Mario 3 20+ years after you bought it, you most definitely have a point. Somewhere, I still have tonnes of Commodore 64 games and programs from the likes of 1985, and if I wanted I'd still be able to use all of them (provided the pesky datassette decides to work...worst data storage system ever!).

However, the idea of services and even goods only being temporary took a firm hold in the last few years. A lot of things you can buy today will be useless in 10 years time or less. Smartphones, software and tablets are only a few examples of an entire galaxy of products that rely on remote services. The day Google/Apple decide to move on to new systems and pull the plug on their current services, is the day you'll have a couple of paper weights around the house. Paper weights you probably paid 400-600€ for.

The same applies for "remote delivery services" such as Steam and generally games that rely on an "always on" connection even for singleplayer. Last but not least, MMOs: the turn towards the "Free to play" is only a recent twist, brought in by the Chinese and Korean publishers; In the past, you paid full price for the games plus monthly subscriptions - games whose servers could and, in some cases, have been unplugged after only a few years.

The whole online-dependant concept is not being invented with Xbox One; It's been here for years, becoming more and more dominant, while the final customer not only let it happen but embraced and enjoyed it with little to no criticism whatsoever (it would only surface when something went wrong, e.g. Sim City). I find it funny that the whole outcry only starts when Microsoft joins the playfield.

RasTa

H3llR4iser wrote: »

You understand the concept, I have no doubt about it, but judging from the outcry on the internet, the wast majority of people don't - all they are concerned with seems to be the fact they might not be able to resell their games, an operation which has been kind of tolerated until now, is nice to take advantage of from the cosnumer's point of view (I already spoke about enjoying second-hand games myself), but is definitely not a right.

As for playing Super Mario 3 20+ years after you bought it, you most definitely have a point. Somewhere, I still have tonnes of Commodore 64 games and programs from the likes of 1985, and if I wanted I'd still be able to use all of them (provided the pesky datassette decides to work...worst data storage system ever!).

However, the idea of services and even goods only being temporary took a firm hold in the last few years. A lot of things you can buy today will be useless in 10 years time or less. Smartphones, software and tablets are only a few examples of an entire galaxy of products that rely on remote services. The day Google/Apple decide to move on to new systems and pull the plug on their current services, is the day you'll have a couple of paper weights around the house. Paper weights you probably paid 400-600€ for.

The same applies for "remote delivery services" such as Steam and generally games that rely on an "always on" connection even for singleplayer. Last but not least, MMOs: the turn towards the "Free to play" is only a recent twist, brought in by the Chinese and Korean publishers; In the past, you paid full price for the games plus monthly subscriptions - games whose servers could and, in some cases, have been unplugged after only a few years.

The whole online-dependant concept is not being invented with Xbox One; It's been here for years, becoming more and more dominant, while the final customer not only let it happen but embraced and enjoyed it with little to no criticism whatsoever (it would only surface when something went wrong, e.g. Sim City). I find it funny that the whole outcry only starts when Microsoft joins the playfield.

This is waffle and a waste of time, stop making half-hearted excuses for whatever reason.

Stone Deaf 4evr

RasTa wrote: »

This is waffle and a waste of time, stop making half-hearted excuses for whatever reason.

How is it waffle? he has a valid point, an unpopular one, but a point nonetheless.
this is something that has crept in over time, but its taken something like the xbox debacle to really get people talking.

was it bruce willis that took apple to court recently because it emerged that your itunes library dies with you? - i.e. you cant bequeath it to someone in your will.

H3llR4iser

RasTa wrote: »

This is waffle and a waste of time, stop making half-hearted excuses for whatever reason.

Why don't you point out what you think are the issues in my post then? You are adding nothing to the discussion, other than "I don't know what to say, and I don't want others to listen to what you are saying".

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

How is it waffle? he has a valid point, an unpopular one, but a point nonetheless.
this is something that has crept in over time, but its taken something like the xbox debacle to really get people talking.

was it bruce willis that took apple to court recently because it emerged that your itunes library dies with you? - i.e. you cant bequeath it to someone in your will.

My point, exactly. In all fairness, I genuinely think there is some merit to the whole topic, and it's good that the discussion has finally sparked up.

The big issue, however, is that most people are applying the typical "two measures" approach: it's ok if all of our games/songs/movies/whatever libraries are online and subject to technical faults, connectivity issues and the will of the service owner, as long as said owner is not Microsoft.

It degrades the discussion to the "nerdrage university campus banter" level, Microsoft bashing et all, taking focus off the central issue: most of us are currently, and will for a long time, pay for things that we have no guarantee whatsoever will be there for us to use in 2 hours time, let alone in years.

RasTa

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

How is it waffle? he has a valid point, an unpopular one, but a point nonetheless.
this is something that has crept in over time, but its taken something like the xbox debacle to really get people talking.

was it bruce willis that took apple to court recently because it emerged that your itunes library dies with you? - i.e. you cant bequeath it to someone in your will.

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Why don't you point out what you think are the issues in my post then? You are adding nothing to the discussion, other than "I don't know what to say, and I don't want others to listen to what you are saying".

It's pointless and not worth my time to respond. The scenario he outlined, waffling on about phones and tablets(when discussing consoles)

I'm not even sure of the excuse he is trying to make his points are so all over the place.

I'm a casual gamer who owns both a 360 and PS3 so only care about games. I buy most of my games on the PSN network anyway(indie titles) but someone coming up with logic for this MS DRM makes me laugh and and ain't going to debate it it as I mentioned there is no positive spin that anybody can try and come up with.

Dyr

H3llR4iser wrote: »

You understand the concept, I have no doubt about it, but judging from the outcry on the internet, the wast majority of people don't - all they are concerned with seems to be the fact they might not be able to resell their games, an operation which has been kind of tolerated until now, is nice to take advantage of from the cosnumer's point of view (I already spoke about enjoying second-hand games myself), but is definitely not a right.

The EU has come fairly strongly down on the idea that reselling your games is definitely a right.

Steam doesn't require an always on connection to play single player, once your login is cached on the machine you're good to go offline

H3llR4iser

RasTa wrote: »

It's pointless and not worth my time to respond. The scenario he outlined, waffling on about phones and tablets(when discussing consoles)

I'm not even sure of the excuse he is trying to make his points are so all over the place.

I'm a casual gamer who owns both a 360 and PS3 so only care about games. I buy most of my games on the PSN network anyway(indie titles) but someone coming up with logic for this MS DRM makes me laugh and and ain't going to debate it it as I mentioned there is no positive spin that anybody can try and come up with.

This is just a "DRM is BAD!" point of view, with no reason nor reasoning given about WHY it is. Besides all the banter, usually sustained by nothing other than "everybody says so!", the truth is that the Xbox One system will change exactly nothing for the vast majority of people who, like you and me, just buy the games either in brick and mortar or online stores and play them.

The tablet and smartphone part is not waffle, it's called "examples". They are devices that are pricey and totally tied to a service provider. Take them offline and their use is essentially that of a doorstop. It's a very similar concept to what is being introduced with Xbox One, yet people not only have nothing to complain about, they swear by Apple/Google, in the most typical showing of use of different measures.

Dyr

H3llR4iser wrote: »

This is just a "DRM is BAD!" point of view, with no reason nor reasoning given about WHY it is. Besides all the banter, usually sustained by nothing other than "everybody says so!", the truth is that the Xbox One system will change exactly nothing for the vast majority of people who, like you and me, just buy the games either in brick and mortar or online stores and play them.

The tablet and smartphone part is not waffle, it's called "examples". They are devices that are pricey and totally tied to a service provider. Take them offline and their use is essentially that of a doorstop. It's a very similar concept to what is being introduced with Xbox One, yet people not only have nothing to complain about, they swear by Apple/Google, in the most typical showing of use of different measures.

My Nexus 7 works fine offline

NORTH1

Nolars wrote: »

Xbox one + 1 game 249.99 when you trade in a 250gb xbox 360 slim + 4 select games - Gamestop.

This is great, but wait. ..... what do I do with the hundreds of games I have bought over the last couple of years? I still throw in a few original xbox games into the 360 from time to time. So I trade in the 360, and my library of games becomes redundant.

Not really a smart move for those who like to drop back onto games from time to time.

I think I will hold onto my 360, and hope MS come to there senses and realise that they are where they are today because of us consumers.

evolutionqy7

NORTH1 wrote: »

This is great, but wait. ..... what do I do with the hundreds of games I have bought over the last couple of years? I still throw in a few original xbox games into the 360 from time to time. So I trade in the 360, and my library of games becomes redundant.

Not really a smart move for those who like to drop back onto games from time to time.

I think I will hold onto my 360, and hope MS come to there senses and realise that they are where they are today because of us consumers.

This guy needs to go. Think he has gotten too arrogant with his position


Xbox chief: we have a product for people who can't get online, it's called Xbox 360


http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/12/don-mattrick-xbox-360-offline/

drumswan

H3llR4iser wrote: »

The big issue, however, is that most people are applying the typical "two measures" approach: it's ok if all of our games/songs/movies/whatever libraries are online and subject to technical faults, connectivity issues and the will of the service owner, as long as said owner is not Microsoft.

Waffle. What other service would you pay for where the vendor has to OK your continued use every 24 hours, with no guarantee that they will? This is nothing like Steam or Itunes or tablets.

RasTa

H3llR4iser wrote: »

This is just a "DRM is BAD!" point of view, with no reason nor reasoning given about WHY it is. Besides all the banter, usually sustained by nothing other than "everybody says so!", the truth is that the Xbox One system will change exactly nothing for the vast majority of people who, like you and me, just buy the games either in brick and mortar or online stores and play them.

.

What exactly do you need spelling out? Have you seen the amount of used games for sale in the brick and mortar shops?

Yeah I use my Nexus on a plane, same for iPad users with no internet.