Just how badly does Microsoft want the Xbox One to fail

[Fragony]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...ts-us-to-smile

Seriously, why do they think people want a spybox. This is absolutily rediculous. This thing has massive fail written all over it.

Sony underestimated themselves when they released the powerfull but unwieldy ps3, but the ps4 looks like a really good piece of hardware but Microsoft perfected stupidity.

[rickinator9]

I think Microsoft are trying to increase profits through game sales. They know people aren't going to like it, but, hey, it's better than no Xbox at all right?

Everyone says the PC market is dying, but I think the console market is dying. Sony and Microsoft only started getting profits after the consoles being out for 3 years after which, according to Moore's law, PC hardware has gotten much better.

[Papewaio]

Aren't the PS4 and XBOX one the same sub standard PC chip in a different shaped box?

[Fragony]

Aren't the PS4 and XBOX one the same sub standard PC chip in a different shaped box?

Ps4 is a monstr it has 8 gb of ram and a superfast processor. It wont't outclass a VERY expensive pc of course

[Beskar]

Ps4 is a monstr it has 8 gb of ram and a superfast processor.

Being honest, 8gig isn't much. I had that since 6 years ago. I see basic gamer boxes with like 32gig now. Though 32gig is kind of pointless due to the fact programmes are limited to 3gig.

[Fragony]

Being honest, 8gig isn't much. I had that since 6 years ago. I see basic gamer boxes with like 32gig now. Though 32gig is kind of pointless due to the fact programmes are limited to 3gig.

For a console it's more than enough seems to be the concencus, the Killzone 3 demo looks better than anything I have seen on a pc, and uses only a fraction of the hardware. If developers are thrilled it can't be bad

[Papewaio]

Ps4 is a monstr it has 8 gb of ram and a superfast processor. It wont't outclass a VERY expensive pc of course

RAM is well cheap as chips

My two year old PC was based on a budget PC with a few components upgraded. Video card is one of the upgraded parameters. It is less then a thousand (considering Aussies pay more for virtually all PC stuff) has 8 GB.

RAM is like desk space, it generally determines how many apps you can open or how large a table or database you can build in one go. GPUs determine how glossy those apps look.

RAM generally isn't the bottleneck anymore.

[Fragony]

Well I am no techie and I probably just failed trying to act like one, but developers really appear to like that extra space. As I understand the ps4 is a really powerfull. I don't really care about graphics but wouldn't more RAM be usefull to make bigger gameworlds and more refined AI, videocard handling the actual graphics?

[Fragony]

You are probably right that the console market has the most to worry about. The ps4 will be ahead for two years or so, but casual PC's will have cought up by then. I also get the feeling everbody is kinda satisfied with the current gen, I am at least. I was absolutely awed when I saw Battlefield running on a friend's pc on extreme, but I don't really care that much to actually pay for it. It's good enough as it is, for now at least

[drone]

That's not unusual at all, in fact that's the way games have always worked. Every single game disc you have in your home right now is the exact same way. You own the actual disc itself (meaning the plastic and other components), but you have NEVER owned the game code on the disc or on your computer. That has always been a license, the above is just the same way the industry has always worked.

You have never owned the game code in the copyright sense, but you were free to do with your licence what you wished after purchase. First-sale doctrine.

Aren't the PS4 and XBOX one the same sub standard PC chip in a different shaped box?

Yup. Consoles have never been top of the line compared to PCs, and the next gen will be no exception. It's nice that they are consolodating the architectures, should make porting games easier, but the new specs aren't much better than what you will be able to get for a PC at nearly the same price. I've said before that the next gen would be weak, since the video specs are maxed at 1080p for the foreseeable future.

The biggest issue I have with the XBone is the kinect/microphone. Microsoft has a weak reputation when it comes to secure software, plus they apparently are more than willing to bend over for the government. Sticking a camera/microphone, connected to the internet 24/7, in a living room or bedroom is something you just shouldn't do. Smart TVs also fall into this category.

[Xiahou]

Smart TVs also fall into this category.

In Soviet Russia, your TV watches you!

So basically Steam. Big deal, we love Steam. Welcome to the digital age, console users.

That applies to pretty much every feature you outline doesn't it? Unless I'm mistaken, Steam doesn't let you sell your old games or buy used ones. And while it doesn't require you to phone home every 24hrs an Internet connection is required before you can play any games.

I think it's crap, but as he points out- Steam fans shouldn't mind at all.

[TinCow]

You have never owned the game code in the copyright sense, but you were free to do with your licence what you wished after purchase. First-sale doctrine.

True, but that's impossible with digital copies. PC gamers (me included) kvetched about this for a while after the switch to digital distribution started many years ago, but we long ago not only stopped complaining but actively embraced the system. If you asked PC gamers whether they'd prefer to keep the current system or return to the old disc-based economy, with its freedom to trade games, I would guess that the vast majority of gamers would prefer to stay where we are now. For most of us, the convenience (and lower prices) outweigh the loss of that ability. I think console gamers will follow the exact same trend in sentiment regarding this issue.

There's also a reality that these kinds of restrictions are designed to help the developers and publishers themselves and to fight piracy. I know plenty of game developers. They get paid peanuts and their jobs are constantly at risk due to being in a heavily volatile industry. If the consumer has to take a few knocks here and there to give a less-brutal existence to the very people who create the games we love to play, I think that's a fair trade-off.

[drone]

True, but that's impossible with digital copies. PC gamers (me included) kvetched about this for a while after the switch to digital distribution started many years ago, but we long ago not only stopped complaining but actively embraced the system. If you asked PC gamers whether they'd prefer to keep the current system or return to the old disc-based economy, with its freedom to trade games, I would guess that the vast majority of gamers would prefer to stay where we are now. For most of us, the convenience (and lower prices) outweigh the loss of that ability. I think console gamers will follow the exact same trend in sentiment regarding this issue.

You like Steam, and I will admit that it is the best of the bunch. But Valve is a privately owned company that is currently run by a benevolent dictator, it is an anomoly which fortuantely controls a large share of the market. However, the day will come when Valve is subject to the whims of shareholders, and we will be stuck with crap like Origin which will get worse without the benevolent Steam alternative to counter the anti-consumer policies these companies engage in.

There's also a reality that these kinds of restrictions are designed to help the developers and publishers themselves and to fight piracy. I know plenty of game developers. They get paid peanuts and their jobs are constantly at risk due to being in a heavily volatile industry. If the consumer has to take a few knocks here and there to give a less-brutal existence to the very people who create the games we love to play, I think that's a fair trade-off.

Nothing a company does will successfully eliminate piracy and still give a positive user experience.

[TinCow]

There are four basic aspects of that list, and I don't think it's quite as hysterical a situation as people are making it out to be, though one aspect raises my eyebrows.

• You do not own the games you buy. You license them.
• Discs are only used to install and then license games and do not imply ownership.

That's not unusual at all, in fact that's the way games have always worked. Every single game disc you have in your home right now is the exact same way. You own the actual disc itself (meaning the plastic and other components), but you have NEVER owned the game code on the disc or on your computer. That has always been a license, the above is just the same way the industry has always worked.

• People can play games installed on your console whether you're logged in or not.
• 10 people can be authorised to play these games on a different Xbox One via the cloud, but not at the same time, similar to iTunes authorised devices.
• Your account allows you to play the games you license on any console.

So basically Steam. Big deal, we love Steam. Welcome to the digital age, console users.

• Publishers decide whether you can trade in your games and may charge for this.
• Publishers decide whether you can give a game you own to someone for free, and this only works if they have been on your friends list for 30 days.
• Loaning and renting games will not be possible at launch, but Microsoft is "exploring the possibilities".

This is a bigger deal, but the used game market has been a major problem for publishers/developers for a very long time. They're getting outright exploited by companies like Gamestop, and something needs to be done to fix the situation. I'm not sure whether this is the answer, but something has got to be done and maybe this is it. Whether it works or not and whether it's bad for the industry will depend on how the publishers respond and it's too early to know that.

• Your Xbox One must connect to the internet every 24 hours to keep playing games.
• When playing on another Xbox One with your account, this is reduced to one hour.

This is the biggest deal, and it could be a major one. I saw some statistics somewhere that about 75-80% of the XBox userbase is currently connected to the internet. That means that Microsoft is risking losing 20-25% of their customer base with this move. At the same time, the above features wouldn't work well without an internet connection at all. Every 24 hours does seem a bit extreme, a Steam method (offline/online mode) would probably be better. The reality is that this is an aspect that is not going to have any impact at all on the vast majority of owners, but a massive impact on a minority of owners. It'll take some time to see whether the decision to alienate that minority was smart or not.