The horrors of the new X-Box.

@frogdog: true and funny enough, even ironic, my favourite FPS is a Playstation exclusive - KILLZONE! ahahh

The damn thing isn't even a year old and isn't even close to being that baren-wasteland the ps3 was at launch, and what does an IPhone 2 have any connection to WiiU fans.

@deranged_midget:

the fanboy rage virus is spreading i never thought you would be infected.

its easy to call a stupid move innovative but its not. sony won this round period.

"you have aloud this dark lord(casual gaming) to twist your mind until now...until now you(xbox one)have become the very thing you swore to destroy."

-Obi Wan Kenobi

Sony it is then..

It's not called "fanboy rage", it's called logic mate and not jumping the gun. I don't care for this petty "console war" whatsoever, but in terms of games, Sony is more intriguing at this point, but otherwise, they could be doing the exact same thing as Microsoft.

Agreed, this is completely lame. While i may be excited about next gen consoles, Microsoft is becoming more and more tedious to be a patron of; and their accessiblity is already tenuous, at best.

You and me both mate and that's why I don't understand the outrage. People jump the gun too much and it's more than evident in this case. I would prefer that Microsoft and Sony focused both primarily on games but it's all about consumerism. If someone honestly thinks that Sony ISN'T going to in someway have a comparative media hub to Microsoft, then I'd say they would be rather daft to assume so.

Gamers aren't the only people who purchase consoles anymore and sadly, they aren't primarily used for gaming either. Casual uses have grown substantially in the past few years with people watching films utilizing Netflix or the various streaming apps available.

Both Sony and Microsoft care little for a "true gaming experience" and aim for simply for whatever makes them the most money. Expanding their market allows for that, hence why the Xbox One focuses on being the "Entertainment hub of the living room". Why is this going to work? Because people ALWAYS complain about something in the beginning but consumerism always takes hold. It becomes the "new thing" on the block and everyone wants it. People adapt to it and both companies are confidently betting on this. This is the case with almost everything that tries to attempt something "new and daring" and the evidence is in the past with the mere mention of consoles breaking into the video game world in the first place.

A slight exaggeration perhaps, but it isn't far from the truth at all. Almost anything in regards to the latest technology requires an interent connection to be of any significant use. Take a PC for example. Sure you can play a physical game without utilizing the internet but as evidenced, digital sales severely outweigh those of the physical kind. Additionally, the vast majority of PC users utilize their computer for internet access whether it be checking their e-mail, surfing the internet on the various social networks, streaming or downloading tv shows/films, etc.

Additionally, take a look at mobile devices. Originally meant for simple uses such as calling and texting but it's expanded greatly beyond that. People want to check their email, they almost always have to have a decent high-speed connection. They want to download music from iTunes or whatever music HUB is available, a suitable internet connection is advised. Someone wants to downloaded the latest hit app, have to access the internet.

It's 2013, it's a new age and the world is adapting to a time where almost everything revolves around the usage of the internet. Jump back a decade and we didn't even have commercially available wireless networks that were suitable for anyone to use. The simple mention of "always connected" would be appalling even a mere five years ago. It is now a time when almost everything is wireless, where everything is accessible without having to be "directly connected" and it's a lot more streamlined and simple. Even though people are weary and despise the idea of it, we all soon adapt to it in time.

Obviously, this isn't to say that Microsoft and or Sony aren't alienating a portion of their audience that may not have suitable access to the internet but the unfortunate truth is that they don't really care. The audience that they are primarily directly aimed at are accustomed to having the luxuries of wireless internet and the most recent technological innovations on the market and that's fine to them. Sadly, it seems that they adopted that "adapt or fall behind" attitude.

That is simply untrue. I use a large number of programs in my work. They are of significant use, I would go as far as to say I might not be able to do my job at all without them. Much less make a profit.

The only one that requires an internet connection is gmail.

The world isn't video games and apps. Those are nice, but they're toys, and they represent a portion of the electronic world, not the whole of the electronic world.

It's 2013, it's a new age and the world is adapting to a time where almost everything revolves around the usage of the internet. Jump back a decade and we didn't even have commercially available wireless networks that were suitable for anyone to use. The simple mention of "always connected" would be appalling even a mere five years ago. It is now a time when almost everything is wireless, where everything is accessible without having to be "directly connected" and it's a lot more streamlined and simple. Even though people are weary and despise the idea of it, we all soon adapt to it in time.

Obviously, this isn't to say that Microsoft and or Sony aren't alienating a portion of their audience that may not have suitable access to the internet but the unfortunate truth is that they don't really care. The audience that they are primarily directly aimed at are accustomed to having the luxuries of wireless internet and the most recent technological innovations on the market and that's fine to them. Sadly, it seems that they adopted that "adapt or fall behind" attitude.

That's fine, Microsoft can and should do what they feel is in the interests of their stockholders. I'm not here to talk about optimal business strategies for them, merely to point out that it is completely false to say that 'Everything requires an internet connection'.

It doesn't.

I never referred to the world by being situated by video games and apps but they are an ever growing portion in the electronics industry and quickly taking the top spot. That much is certain and is evidenced by some of it becoming world wide news and as "important" as the next iPhone or Android smart phone.

I'm not arguing that there are programs that are of use to many people, depending on the job that do not require the internet but that's not the world at large. You can't tell me that you believe that the vast majority of the world doesn't spend most of their time on a PC/Laptop surfing the internet, watching/streaming tv shows off of YouTube or the countless websites in which you can download films, visiting social networks, or public forums- take this one for a perfect example.

The world in regards to technology is revolving towards to internet dependancy in a large way, especially for casual audiences which make up the vast majority of people who utilize technology.

I never said "Everything", I said almost anything in regards to electronics requires an internet connection for greater and expanded use and I already detailed that further in my original post. And yes, I was referring primarily to Microsoft, Sony and video games at large, but this does extend to casual PC use, mobile phones, heck- even some Satellite usage runs off the Internet now.

It's an expanding market and it is safe to say that the world is slowly adapting to that in an easier way year by year as we create more streamlined wireless networks and integrated electronic devices and possibly by the end of this decade or the middle of the next, the world would've completely undergone this change.

Appreciate the input.

X-Box= EW, UGH!

It is incredible how people simply complain about Xbox One,which was announced yesterday!I mean,I'm not a fanboy,I'll do some researching before buying my next console,but I still not going around and saying bad stuff.I mean,E3 hasn't even happened,only some things are known,so before you go down and try to make fun of the console,please do have a solid base of arguments.

E3 isn't going remove their money grabbing rules on Used games

Well,perhaps it isn't that bad.I mean,that's one bad point,but no one actually cares about the fact that it will recognize your voice,or that it'll finally be blu-ray.The only thing everyone is doing:"It looks like a VHS" or "Rules on used games?What a crappy console.",well,no one is saying bad things about PS4,for example,I bet it's internet system will be so poor that being hacked will be like a daily routine,I may be wrong though.

@deranged_midget: i was kidding about the fanboy thing FYI

https://images.4channel.org/f/src/Xbox%20One.swf

@deadpoolrules:

dude PSN has always been reliable

if you have decent internet speed you will be fine.

last time anonymous hacked PSN and they hack the news, government websites tv broadcasts etc they can hack anything.

"I bet it's internet system will be so poor that being hacked will be like a daily routine"

do i even have to tell you how dumb that sounded

Dear Microsoft

don't you have any fuc*ing shame?

from,

everyone

Before writing this I must say I've never owned an Xbox but I've always respected the people behind it. But the amount of failures in the announcements that have come out so far is incredible

Number 1 Xbox one will confuse the casual market they seem to be aiming for.

Number 2 the every 24 hour Internet thing has already ruled out a chunk of the gamer community not to mention those who do not have very high Internet speeds.

Number 3 voice commands are going to fail reason being they have to get accurate readings for not just all of the different languages but also the different accents. I'm Irish and the speech to text program Microsoft had never worked for me I dunno how it's gonna work here.

Number 3 the tech is BDDR 3 three years old technology Sony has BDDR 5. Xbox does have 8 gig ram which is the same as Sony but will use more power with the tv and tablet functionality so really only 5 gig ram is being used for games

Number 4 Xbox is touting this as all you need for entertainment but you still need a tv box to plug into the Xbox one so I must ask why bother with the tv functionality

Number 5 kinect is forced yet still has distance problems which is horrible for places like Japan where the rooms are crammed so they can't use it.

Number 6 the installation fees are unnecessary and if I wanted to install I'd use a Pc because that way I could get a better hard drive and better graphics

Number 7 with the new tech updates will be frequent and a nightmare

Number 8 no off button

Number 9 Friend sits next to you and says "Xbox tv" as your playing your game, need I say more?

Number 10 the last problem I have is the motto behind Xbox in comparison to Sony Xbox said "we're about being in your living room" Sony said "were about the gamer"

1. It'll only let you play on teh account of the owner of teh game. SO If i bring my JamesKM716 account to DerangedMidget's house we can play it together through my account, and then you have basically a demo left once I leave. You can then choose to pay a fee and own that demo/game wholly.

2. The thing that woudl bother me the most is how they would implement having an Internet Connection. If it's like SimCity where I have to have connection 24/7 or it won't let me play the games, then it'll upset me. But the way they've said it'll be so far, is that it just has to "check in" once every 24 hours.

3. Yeah, but traditionally MicroSoft doesn't focus heavily on games at their E3. Last year IIRC they focused on Kinect heavily. If they do focus on games, i'll be mildly surprised.

That's what I originally stated, but they've also come out to say that if someone wanted to play the game or lend it to their friend, you'd have to completely uninstall the game from your hard drive to allow your friend to play it on his console, as to keep people from playing a single game from two separate devices. If you both wanted to keep it installed then yes, a fee would have to be paid on the second account.

There's a lot of positives and negatives to having a constant internet connection. From a negative standpoint, some may not have the suitable internet access to constantly be connected. Evidently, Microsoft takes that gamble and assumes that most of their audience do have the capability to have constant access to the internet. Another reason is that if there may be a power outage or you lose internet and if the internet is needed for the Xbox to turn on or remain on while playing games, then it'd be a problem. Although, from a positive perspective, system updates can be down flawlessly and without hassle as the system would be able to download on it's own so when you're ready to play, you don't have to wait.

That's true if you refer to maybe the last few years. Before they announced Kinect, they've focused on games just as much as any of the other competitors. From a logical standpoint, by spending their entire reveal discussing the specifics about how the console operates and what else it can do, it leaves them open to focusing on the gaming side of things during E3.

It's a double sided coin mate. Sony spent their entire reveal showcasing games and drawing in gamers, which was smart on their part. But they took no time to explain the details of their console, leaving it up to them to spend more time doing that during E3. I choose to remain optimistic in regards to both systems as I've stated before that I care very little about this petty "console war".

@jameskm716: The internet check-in won't be a big deal...provided that you have a reliable internet connection. I play several MMORPGs on my computer, but I also keep a few non-online games installed, so that if my internet connection goes down, I can still play a game.

Both consoles aren't worth it.

I'm sticking with my ps3,xbox360 and pc :)

Really? Ugh that bothers me so much.

That's fair. I think it's highly overrated exactly how "bad" Always-Online is.

Ah, in all honesty about when I started focusing in on Gaming was about when they announced the Kinetic, so that's all the history I got with them. I sincerely hope they focus on games. I'd love that.

Personally though, I'm totally cool with how Sony did it. They announced several games, which'll get everyone pumped for them. And then they have their personal press conference where they cna detail console specifics like price and how it'll work. THey have the whole of E3 itself for the games, they don't have to stuff it into their own press conference.

As I see it now, Microsoft seems to be catering to the casual gamers, while Sony is catering to gamers. I like that more, so per the moment I'm prefering PS4

I do not like this.

@biteme_fanboy said:

Holy *****

Really not interested in this next gen, I've found the current one to be largely lacklustre.

I see it like this.. Xbox is a friend I have to give an intervention to (not buy their console) but when they get their act together I'll welcome them back with open arms... until then no deal. But Sony's attitude is making me push them away too.

Remember when the worst of a gamer's worries were if the cartridge was full of dust and if you blew hard enough to clean it? Ahhh the times.... Graphics, gameplay and depth kinda sucked though. Nyehehehehehe!

Whoever purchases an X-Box One should be publicly shamed. They advertized people being annoying by "Skyping" you while watching TV or playing games as if that is a good thing. What if you're doing something you're not suppose to be doing in front of the Kinect? Let's also not forget to mention how creepy it is that it is on 24/7 and how easy technology is to hack nowadays. Then theres the crappy voice recognition. Is it really that difficult to push input and turn your x box off manually or even from your controller? And finally the internet connection requirement. Nice way to limit gamers who don't primarily care about online gaming like myself. What a douche move. The sad thing is people will actually pay all that money for this crap. If Sony doesn't fallow suite, you can bet your ass there will be a ps4 in my home rather than an xbox one.

Well, looks I'm getting a gaming PC.

dang Bungie on Play Station?! Never thought I'd see the day

PC!

As am I, in terms of actually capturing the essence of what the majority of core gamers want, Sony definitely succeeded in delivering a far better reveal conference of what appears to be the console's primary focus and that's all they need to do. The reveal conference was their initial conference. The only other time they have to showcase the console is E3, or at least that's how every big company likes to do it, on centre stage and what not.

At the moment, Microsoft seems to be doing one of two things in my opinion. Attempting to increasingly expand their system's capabilities as to broaden their audience, and thus alienating their core audience (at the moment). From my logical stand-point and my assumption, Microsoft could've taken a gamble in making their entire reveal conference about the console itself and it's other capabilities besides gaming because essentially, the reveal conference was about the console itself, not about games. Having said, they could be saving everything for E3 itself as that is the time to focus solely on gaming as they won't really need to speak much about the console at this point.

To be honest, I am curious as to where both Microsoft and Sony are headed in the near future but I remain optimistic for both companies.

I think that what we're seeing is the specialization of the market. Ultimately, this could be a good thing, as it will result in manufacturers picking one or several areas to focus on, rather than trying to be all things for all people (and only managing mediocrity at best in most of them). Sony seems to be targeting the "hardcore gamer," the player that's into competitive multiplayer and is looking for the latest and greatest cutting-edge technology, and is thus willing to pay more for it. Nintendo seems to be focusing on the "social gamer," the player that just want to have some fun, often with friends/family members that are in the same room, rather than at the other end of an internet connection. Microsoft seems to be focusing on the "gamer that hates himself and everyone else" demographic.

Nope,I have a great connection,but hacking is easy.I mean,Anonymous is a big event,I'm talking about small ones.For example,I know a dude which hacked many other people accounts.He had all DLC he wanted,all because,and I quote,"Hacking the Playstation network is as easy as hacking a Gameboy,bro.Unless you have Plus."So,I do believe in this man,not saying it will suck,just saying it is possible.

@dragonborn_ct: thanks for the laugh bro. i needed it. but yeah sh*t's bad.

They lost me at Kinect mandatory and no backwards compatibility, couldn't give 2 ****s about "always on" or no used games, this is the generation where I became a PC gamer...

Hmm. Early days yet, but not sure I like where this is going O_o

@thetimestreamer: You are welcome man. Yeah like the other guy said, this is the generation I become a PC gamer...

@deranged_midget: Regardless. X-box has always sucked and is continuing to suck.

Ps4 it is then

I'd like to preface this by saying I think @irishlad made some of the best and most concise points in the thread.

This honestly has nothing to do with Sony vs. Microsoft. As has been pointed out, Sony has been pretty quiet about a lot of the major features of their system and it is quite possible that they and Microsoft are on the same page with how they are dealing with used games (because let's face it, that's the reason for the Internet connectivity thing).

We have had the opportunity in the last couple years to see what happens when a game requires an Internet connection to function. Last I checked Sim City had a 1.5/5 rating on Amazon with thousands of reviews. Diablo III drove many players insane -- to the point where when the devs looked at translating the game to console, they intentionally removed the online requirement aspect of the game. The Xbox One will not implicitly require a constant connection but by focusing on a cloud-based server support system, they are likely planning for developers to depend on off-box resources to run their games, meaning many (and eventually all) games will require a connection to the server to supply all the things they don't want to dedicate your personal Xbox's resources to running. It's Microsoft's clever way of ushering in a required connection without being the bad guys who demand a constant connection.

The only problem is that in order to play any Xbox One game, you need to have a connection. For people, and there are many of them, for whom that is simply not an option, you just precluded their ability to join your next generation of gaming. That's it. They are no longer Microsoft customers. That's people at apartment complexes, colleges, military bases, and many other places which, for bandwidth or security reasons, block gaming connections on their networks, where people who have spent the last decade or more playing the latest Halo can now no longer do so at all. And even if they could run it, the new system means that every person who wanted to have their own profile attached to the game would need to buy their own copy.

Now I'm not so worried about the crappy sharing or used game aspects. I have always bought new, and if that meant I could only play one game a month instead of three, so be it. But most of my life was spent growing up with siblings in the house, and that usually meant for Christmas or birthdays we would ask for games and then we would share them. Let's pretend my brother and I are back in high school and we get Halo 5. I attach it to my gamertag via the code. Now if he wants to play he has to buy the game over again. Houses with multiple siblings who want to play a game? The cost becomes staggering. Even spouses or couples who live together who have spent the last generation racking up their own separate gamerscores, often on their own consoles because otherwise they'd have to fight over the TV. Now they are forced to pony up for two copies of the same game; they can't just toss it from the living room to the bedroom when one of them wants to trade.

Someone will suggest "so why don't they just share a gamertag?" And aside from the obvious detriment to individuality which the whole Xbox ethos is supposed to celebrate (nevermind your Xbox trying to recognize "your" voice when "you" is two or more people), we have the issue of a game like Bioshock Infinite, which did away with save files and tied your save directly to your gamertag, meaning that couple who has decided to bite the bullet still can't play the game at the same time, because a new game overwrites the other person's progress. Even if you waited until your partner finished before you played, you'd have lost the simple joy of earning your own achievements, something which clearly matters to gamers because gamification is everywhere.

Online connections are becoming ubiquitous but we really aren't there. Forcing a connection this way is going to preclude people from gaming, either because they literally can't or because the cost of doing so in a reasonable, enjoyable way is prohibitively high. If Sony does not have a similar requirement, they will obliterate Microsoft in this generation. And if both require it, then Microsoft will win in the roundabout way because many users will flock from the consoles they've used for years to the PC's most of their friends have been telling them are superior for pretty much ever. Steam wouldn't even have to try: they can sit back and watch millions of users renounce their televisions and decide "if I'm going to pay for a glorified computer, at least I can get one with a super cheap distribution system and decades' worth of older games available immediately without having to pay an additional fee (because oh yeah, Xbox Live isn't free)."

So like I said in the beginning, this isn't about Sony vs. Microsoft. This is about console vs. PC, and Microsoft just gave console a massive blow. The question for E3 is whether Sony will deal the knockout.

You stole the thread. Microsoft should stick to other things, and leave gaming to the pros.

They should call the new console the Xbox Vista.

Microsoft has always been the dominant online experience out of the two, they're just expanding on that alone. Internet isn't free.