Console Discussion/E3/Tokyo Game Show Thread

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

/sees OOTP mention, pointed rejoinder regarding "shitty ones"

You're nuts!

[SackAttack]

I played every version of OOTP from, I wanna say 3'ish, up until last year's. The last four years or so got increasingly unplayable. I uninstalled last year's game and gave away my licenses and have had no itch to get back into OOTP. Maybe this is the year they finally got it right, but I have no interest in playing it to see.

[MJ4H]

Here is what it all comes down to for me. If one of the consoles supports the Oculus Rift, I will probably get that console. If none of them do, I'm probably done with new game consoles until a console supports something equivalent/better.

If the wife wants to pick up a Wii U some day, fine. Other than that, I'm sticking with the 3DS if I want to play a game I can't play on my old laptop. Nothing in the new generation excites me at all besides the Oculus Rift.

Alright, back to lurking.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Here is what it all comes down to for me. If one of the consoles supports the Oculus Rift, I will probably get that console. If none of them do, I'm probably done with new game consoles until a console supports something equivalent/better.

If the wife wants to pick up a Wii U some day, fine. Other than that, I'm sticking with the 3DS if I want to play a game I can't play on my old laptop. Nothing in the new generation excites me at all besides the Oculus Rift.

Alright, back to lurking.

Both of the consoles support Oculus Rift.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

MS confirms $60 price point on titles. Sounds like the mandated DRM didn't provide enough incentive to cut the price on games.

Microsoft: Xbox One games are $60 | Joystiq

Also, some movement on how online play is handled on the PS4. Sony is allowing play-for-free game developers to decided whether they want their game to be playable with or without PS+. Planetside 2 and DC Universe both will not require PS+ for online play.

PS4 PlanetSide 2, DC Universe Online will not require PlayStation Plus | Joystiq

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The Xbox One Believers

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Both of the consoles support Oculus Rift.

Neither one has said they will support it yet but I think it is likely it all end up working with both.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Neither one has said they will support it yet but I think it is likely it all end up working with both.

PS President on IGN podcast that I previously posted said that they already have their hands on Oculus Rift dev kits and love what they've seen so far in development.

Also, this article details that developers are using the Oculus Rift in conjunction with the Kinect to enhance the experience.

http://n4g.com/news/1267278/oculus-r...irtual-reality

I'm pretty sure both have clearly stated that they're working on options for the Oculus Rift.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Pretty funny stuff from the Google/Bing search engine world......

Google: The Xbox One Is 'Terrible'; Bing: The Xbox One Is 'Amazing' - Yahoo! Finance

[mckerney]

Giant Bomb is down, but TotalBiscuit just said on his podcast that they put out a report that Microsoft may be doing a 180 on the XBox One DRM.

[mckerney]

Copy of GiantBomb article.

Giant Bomb Article paste - Pastebin.com

Microsoft to Pull Complete Reversal on Xbox One DRM Policies
by Patrick Klepek on June 19, 2013

Sources indicate Microsoft is going to move away from what's caused the company so much headache.
The tug-of-war between Microsoft and Sony just got more interesting. Multiple sources inform me Microsoft will announce what amounts to a complete reversal on its DRM policies for Xbox One today.

What does this mean?

No more always online requirement
The console no longer has to check in every 24 hours
All game discs will work on Xbox One as they do on Xbox 360
An Internet connection is only required when initially setting up the console
All downloaded games will function the same when online or offline
No additional restrictions on trading games or loaning discs
Region locks have been dropped
It is unclear what caused this huge change in policy right after E3, a week where Microsoft executives spent days explaining, justifying, and talking about its policies to the press. I suspect Microsoft’s official announcement will say something to the effect of “we've been closely listening to consumer feedback.”

Based on what I’m being told, that’s definitely true.

I've reached out to Microsoft for comment.

Microsoft has taken an enormous amount of heat regarding DRM policies with its new console. Sony became consumer heroes at E3, announcing PlayStation 4 would not treat used games differently, and the status quo would reign. The company released this video, twisting the knife:

Official PlayStation Used Game Instructional Video - YouTube

Of course, Xbox One is still $499 and PlayStation 4 is still $399. But today moves the needle.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by mckerney

Copy of GiantBomb article.

Giant Bomb Article paste - Pastebin.com

Would be amazing to see if true. Their problem obviously is that they are significantly weakening their position if they do that. You can't just reverse it and make it go away. They spend several weeks explaining how the system was designed specifically to be always on and how great it was going to be for consumers. Assuming this article is true, it does help at some level, but they're going to face a whole new round of questions as to why they went to such an extent to say it was great for consumers only to remove it all after the public called bulls*%# on it.

Was listen to The Video Games Show podcast today. They noted that some Gamestops were reporting a 7:1 presale ratio in favor of the PS4. We'll have to see what kind of effect any announcement has on that ratio.

Edit: They just announced it, but the website crashed. Guessing they haven't installed those X1 servers yet.

[spleen1015]

Why does it matter that they spent time explaining the decision to go with DRM only to finally remove it? All that matters to me is that they've made the right decision and removed it.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Why does it matter that they spent time explaining the decision to go with DRM only to finally remove it? All that matters to me is that they've made the right decision and removed it.

Exactly. They realized they made a mistake much quicker than Sony did last generation and are working to rectify it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Why does it matter that they spent time explaining the decision to go with DRM only to finally remove it? All that matters to me is that they've made the right decision and removed it.

There's a good chunk of people that aren't going to be satisfied with a flip-flop. You can't just be totally tone-deaf to the consumer one moment, get bitch-slapped by your main competitor in front of millions over your tone-deaf stance, and then suddenly do a reversal and expect consumers to believe that you're suddenly refocused on the consumer again.

The time to do the reversal was at E3. If they do that, it's clear that you've heard the masses. What happened was that they assumed that they could get away with it because they assumed there was no way Sony would take the stance they did. They made a very big mistake that they may be able to mend at some level, but the damage has already been done.

[mckerney]

Statement by Microsoft finally up, not surprisingly without the online check in they no longer have the digital sharing and some of the other digital features. Didn't see how it would be possible to keep that them without a connection requirement.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update

Last week at E3, the excitement, creativity and future of our industry was on display for a global audience.

For us, the future comes in the form of Xbox One, a system designed to be the best place to play games this year and for many years to come. As is our heritage with Xbox, we designed a system that could take full advantage of advances in technology in order to deliver a breakthrough in game play and entertainment. We imagined a new set of benefits such as easier roaming, family sharing, and new ways to try and buy games. We believe in the benefits of a connected, digital future.

Since unveiling our plans for Xbox One, my team and I have heard directly from many of you, read your comments and listened to your feedback. I would like to take the opportunity today to thank you for your assistance in helping us to reshape the future of Xbox One.

You told us how much you loved the flexibility you have today with games delivered on disc. The ability to lend, share, and resell these games at your discretion is of incredible importance to you. Also important to you is the freedom to play offline, for any length of time, anywhere in the world.

So, today I am announcing the following changes to Xbox One and how you can play, share, lend, and resell your games exactly as you do today on Xbox 360. Here is what that means:

An internet connection will not be required to play offline Xbox One games – After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.

Trade-in, lend, resell, gift, and rent disc based games just like you do today – There will be no limitations to using and sharing games, it will work just as it does today on Xbox 360.

In addition to buying a disc from a retailer, you can also download games from Xbox Live on day of release. If you choose to download your games, you will be able to play them offline just like you do today. Xbox One games will be playable on any Xbox One console -- there will be no regional restrictions.

These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

We appreciate your passion, support and willingness to challenge the assumptions of digital licensing and connectivity. While we believe that the majority of people will play games online and access the cloud for both games and entertainment, we will give consumers the choice of both physical and digital content. We have listened and we have heard loud and clear from your feedback that you want the best of both worlds.

Thank you again for your candid feedback. Our team remains committed to listening, taking feedback and delivering a great product for you later this year.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Here's the peach statement from the statement.......

We appreciate your passion, support and willingness to challenge the assumptions of digital licensing and connectivity.

They just figured this out? After the organized effort before E3 that clearly stated that no one wanted the DRM policies they were putting forward? Unbelievable.

Also, the comments at the bottom of the Kotaku article are already articulating some of the questions they'll have to face....

By reversing on those policies, Microsoft calls a lot of things into question: what will become of the Xbox One's family sharing plan? Will publishers find other ways to block used games? And what of all the rhetoric of how "the bits"—the data on each game disc, rather than the discs themselves—are the future?

http://kotaku.com/microsoft-is-remov...-drm-514390310

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's a good chunk of people that aren't going to be satisfied with a flip-flop. You can't just be totally tone-deaf to the consumer one moment, get bitch-slapped by your main competitor in front of millions over your tone-deaf stance, and then suddenly do a reversal and expect consumers to believe that you're suddenly refocused on the consumer again.

The time to do the reversal was at E3. If they do that, it's clear that you've heard the masses. What happened was that they assumed that they could get away with it because they assumed there was no way Sony would take the stance they did. They made a very big mistake that they may be able to mend at some level, but the damage has already been done.

I disagree. No damage has been done, you know why? Because no one took home a console and had to deal with it. I don't think this completely wipes away the damage just because there are people in the world that like to always be negative. If they make great games, which they will, people are going to buy the console. This topic will be long forgotten by the masses while PS fanboiys like you will still bring it up 15 years from now.

[Ryan S]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Why does it matter that they spent time explaining the decision to go with DRM only to finally remove it? All that matters to me is that they've made the right decision and removed it.

I think that the reason why the time spent explaining matters is because E3 should have been a showcase for the new Xbox, but it ended up being a PR nightmare for Microsoft.

If they had made this decision a week before E3 the Xbox One would be in a much better position today.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ryan S

I think that the reason why the time spent explaining matters is because E3 should have been a showcase for the new Xbox, but it ended up being a PR nightmare for Microsoft.

If they had made this decision a week before E3 the Xbox One would be in a much better position today.

Exactly. The problem isn't the reversal, it's when the reversal happened. They're going to have to answer questions as to why they defended the decision for weeks, only to do a reversal. Given how poorly they've defended that decision thus far, I'm not sure how well they're going to explain the reversal now.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's a good chunk of people that aren't going to be satisfied with a flip-flop. You can't just be totally tone-deaf to the consumer one moment, get bitch-slapped by your main competitor in front of millions over your tone-deaf stance, and then suddenly do a reversal and expect consumers to believe that you're suddenly refocused on the consumer again.

OTOH, it doesn't matter whether they did this because they're focused on the consumer or because they had a collective pants-shitting and realized it might not be good for the business. Do I trust them not to try it again? No, of course not. The tiger doesn't change its stripes.

On the other hand, I'm now willing to purchase an Xbox One. I think they probably could have figured out a way to meet my concerns without doing a complete 180 as they appear to have done, but doing a complete 180 suits my purposes as well.

The time to do the reversal was at E3. If they do that, it's clear that you've heard the masses. What happened was that they assumed that they could get away with it because they assumed there was no way Sony would take the stance they did. They made a very big mistake that they may be able to mend at some level, but the damage has already been done.

I think the damage is going to be mitigated by what they're doing here. There's a certain damage to the brand, but the pre-sale prospects of the hardware are now limited just to the price differential, and that's really going to come down to how the consumer feels about the Kinect camera and its usability/ramifications.

I won't be buying an Xbox One at launch, in all likelihood, but this change takes my stance from 'not a chance in hell' to 'yes, when I can afford to.'

[SirFozzie]

Microsoft just successfully applied rule 1 to getting out of a hole. (that is, Stop Digging).

Still won't stop me from switching on the preorder, but now at least they're in the game.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I disagree. No damage has been done, you know why? Because no one took home a console and had to deal with it. I don't think this completely wipes away the damage just because there are people in the world that like to always be negative. If they make great games, which they will, people are going to buy the console. This topic will be long forgotten by the masses while PS fanboiys like you will still bring it up 15 years from now.

I think both of these things are key. Making the change now means that they don't have people buying the system who aren't as tuned into the news as we are, and not having that 'wait, what?' rage.

But some damage has been done, certainly. There will be some people who, as you say, just want to be negative. We've seen plenty of that in the console threads here over the last 7 years. There will also be people who will just have already made the decision based on the previously-available information and aren't multi-console types.

But making the change now ensures that the damage done is broad, but shallow, as opposed to deep and lasting.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Do I trust them not to try it again? No, of course not. The tiger doesn't change its stripes.

I think the damage is going to be mitigated by what they're doing here. There's a certain damage to the brand, but the pre-sale prospects of the hardware are now limited just to the price differential, and that's really going to come down to how the consumer feels about the Kinect camera and its usability/ramifications.

I think in the end they haven't hurt themselves by this move. I think that's clear. Your points here are good. Trust is still an issue as is the price moving forward. But an issue of trust is still better than standing in front of millions defending a F U DRM system.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Given how poorly they've defended that decision thus far, I'm not sure how well they're going to explain the reversal now.

"People made it clear they didn't want those features; we still think once they had the system in their hands and saw the benefits, they would have loved them, but no matter how passionately we believe in the product, if our customers tell us they want something different, it's our responsibility to listen."

They can still say that the features that triggered the backlash would have benefited the system, but also acknowledge that they had to listen to their customer base.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

"People made it clear they didn't want those features; we still think once they had the system in their hands and saw the benefits, they would have loved them, but no matter how passionately we believe in the product, if our customers tell us they want something different, it's our responsibility to listen."

They can still say that the features that triggered the backlash would have benefited the system, but also acknowledge that they had to listen to their customer base.

That's passive-aggressive. Saying that they knew it was best but had to listen anyway would be an extremely poor way of stating it. Ultimately, they're still going to face a firestorm of questions. They have to handle it well or it will only create more problems. Couple that with all the bulletin board material over the last week or so and they're going to have an uphill battle.

I'm not sure of the best way for them to attack the upcoming questions. It'll make for an excellent business school test case.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I think in the end they haven't hurt themselves by this move. I think that's clear. Your points here are good. Trust is still an issue as is the price moving forward. But an issue of trust is still better than standing in front of millions defending a F U DRM system.

The thing about trust is that it's going to be a while regaining it - people like myself who prove willing to return to the fold won't necessarily be auto-buy people anymore - but that doesn't mean they won't still be a profitable customer.

They've blown a lot of goodwill equity they had built in the brand, which means they're going to have to be doubly careful going forward, but as long as they don't have any other major missteps, in three years' time this will just have been a bad dream. I still think they're going to give back a pretty significant share of the market gains they made with Xbox 360, but I don't think it will be as severe as it was poised to be previously.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Am I reading this correctly? This looks like they've now abandoned the family sharing plan as part of this change. That was something they were touting as a game-changer.

The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc.

It also appears that installing and playing without a disc has also been removed.

Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

[SackAttack]

Well, yes. Those things were kind of predicated on the DRM restrictions they had in place. If you remove the check-in requirement, you remove the publishers' willingness to allow digital game sharing via the cloud, even with the restrictions that had been in place (can only lend the game once ever, to someone who's been on your list at least 30 days).

The same is also true with the no-disc gameplay. If you remove the required check-in, you either have to find another DRM method to ensure that games don't get installed and passed around (which, any method that did that would be a used-games killer, no?) or drop the install-and-play method entirely.

Let's be fair - there was some potentially nifty stuff included with the cod liver oil there that won't be possible with a complete reversion of policy, and that's unfortunate. I think they could have found a way to split the baby on that and assuage the concerns people like me had while still delivering at least some of what they had envisioned.

But a complete backpedal, while it makes the system something I'm willing to buy now, also makes it much harder to do those digital things.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Some comments as well that the multi-game option shown on E3 will no longer work either. They showed an example that you could play one game while waiting for a multi-player match in the background. If disc is now required, that won't be an option as you only have one disc drive available for games. Probably can still watch TV while waiting for a match, but can't play game while waiting for another match.

The more you look, the more you realize that they're going to have to adjust their console setup to accommodate this switch. They built the interface with a large set of assumptions that have now been totally thrown out the window. Doesn't change much for those of us who use it as a gaming console, but for those that were looking for all the bells and whistles, they'll have to adjust their expectations.

[HeavyReign]

I'm actually kind of disappointed by the change. The family sharing plan was a huge benefit to me. I didn't really care about checking in etc. Wish they would offer digital sales with the family plan enabled but discs work like they did before.

[SackAttack]

The $64,000 Question - what percentage of prospective One buyers were considering it because of the non-gaming features, and what percentage prioritized gaming over the rest?

Put another way, is anybody in this thread who was willing to buy a One before these changes were announced now dropping that interest?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

The $64,000 Question - what percentage of prospective One buyers were considering it because of the non-gaming features, and what percentage prioritized gaming over the rest?

Put another way, is anybody in this thread who was willing to buy a One before these changes were announced now dropping that interest?

I don't know about this thread, but I can't imagine that the net change was a negative for them with this announcement.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by HeavyReign

I'm actually kind of disappointed by the change. The family sharing plan was a huge benefit to me. I didn't really care about checking in etc. Wish they would offer digital sales with the family plan enabled but discs work like they did before.

See, I could have gotten behind that, because digital sales themselves are a sort of DRM. You don't have a disc to pass around.

One benefit I think we're going to see come from this is that with the removal of the installation requirement, the fact that the 500 GB hard drive is - like the original Xbox - built in without a mechanism for upgrade included won't be a long-term hamper on the system. It will still support external storage, but you aren't going to run into a situation where suddenly your hard drive is full of disc-based installs and you have to find room for your digital stuff elsewhere.

Which, that happened to me on PS3. The 60 GB drive eventually got filled up with large install files and I had to upgrade the hard drive just to be able to continue to play new games.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Which, that happened to me on PS3. The 60 GB drive eventually got filled up with large install files and I had to upgrade the hard drive just to be able to continue to play new games.

I'll be interested to see if the removable hard drive is still a standard drive like the PS3. It would be a big advantage in that regard since the X1 drive is non-removable.

Didn't take long for this kind of article to pop up. More of the same questions.

Microsoft and Their Lack of Integrity - Blog by Falcon-X32 - IGN

Edit: Forbes Article. Think this guy hit it on the nose. 'What happens next?' is the question you have to ask. Tokyo Game Show just took on a much bigger role in this generation. You've got to wonder if Sony may sweeten the pot or just take pot shots.

Microsoft To Reverse Xbox One Policies After Fan Revolt - Forbes

[SackAttack]

That's a userblog on IGN though, MBBF. That'd be no different than you writing a screed and posting it to its own thread here. The difference is that he's trading on the journalistic credibility, such as it is, of IGN.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

That's a userblog on IGN though, MBBF. That'd be no different than you writing a screed and posting it to its own thread here. The difference is that he's trading on the journalistic credibility, such as it is, of IGN.

I agree, but they put a link to it on the front page. I suppose that's the +/- of the deal and one of the reasons I tend to steer clear of IGN as I stated in a previous post. But there's a bunch of people that are going to see that on the front page and take it for far more legitimate than it should be. That's not helpful, but it's the reality of the situation.

It should be noted that his site was linked on the article.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Forbes reporting that EA and Activision stocks are down after the news, citing the fact that they will no longer receive a percentage of used games sales on X1. Gamestop is up 6.5%.

[Mota]

All I know is that I'm willing to buy the Xbox One again. I want to buy my games and not license them. And 10 years from now if one of these games is still in my backlog (long after MS has stopped supporting the console) I'd like to be able to go back and finish it.

I don't think we were quite ready for the console-as-a-service thing yet.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

This seems to be a pretty common theme amongst reactions from gamers. These comments are from the guy who organized the no DRM campaign on Twitter.

Pete Dodd a 36-year-old adult caregiver in New Haven, Conn., who had rallied gamers to send messages to industry executives using Twitter, said he was pleased with the changes.

"It's a victory for us," Mr. Dodd said. But Microsoft still has a ways to go before its relationship with enthusiasts, also known a hard-core gamers, is repaired.

"Even the flip flopping on this, even though it's a good sign, it does paint a picture of a corporation that doesn't know what it's doing," he said.

Mr. Dodd said he'll be sticking with his pre-order for the PlayStation 4, which is due later this year. Now that Microsoft's policy has changed, however, he'll consider buying Xbox One later on as well

Microsoft Loosens Xbox One Game Restrictions - WSJ.com

[TroyF]

The world is ok again. Mizzou making irrational points and all.

Look, to spin this as anything but a win for Microsoft is simply not being understanding. A week ago they were the big bad corporation that did not understand their base. When they backtrack, they may look weak to some, but to most they are a company that realized they stepped in it and corrected the mistake.

As big of a PR disaster as this was, they got it figured out and made the right call. Sony, in the same place at the start of the last generation, dug in their heels and destroyed their market share in the process. (Sony went from complete domination to a draw with MS worldwide and a copleye ass kicking in the US)

Microsoft got back in the game today. they did not win t, but they are back in the game.

[Izulde]

I still don't trust them not to put the always online and DRM in later on down the line once the userbase is established.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by TroyF

The world is ok again. Mizzou making irrational points and all.

Look, to spin this as anything but a win for Microsoft is simply not being understanding. A week ago they were the big bad corporation that did not understand their base. When they backtrack, they may look weak to some, but to most they are a company that realized they stepped in it and corrected the mistake.

As big of a PR disaster as this was, they got it figured out and made the right call. Sony, in the same place at the start of the last generation, dug in their heels and destroyed their market share in the process. (Sony went from complete domination to a draw with MS worldwide and a copleye ass kicking in the US)

Microsoft got back in the game today. they did not win t, but they are back in the game.

I don't know that I'd categorize it a win for MS as much as it is a win for consumers. They voted with their wallets and MS had to make the move to avoid 6-7 years of big problems. You're correct that Sony did not respond well, but I think it was a much different situation. It was a price situation more than anything. MS still faces that issue in this generation. If they think their fight is over and all is roses again, they still have blinders on. If anything, they're back to the same position where Sony was in the last generation.

As Bill Harris noted in his blog on the situation, they still are trying to sell the consumer on the 'value' of their console and why consumers should pay $100 more for that console. They need to change their focus on the sales pitch or they're going to end up in the same situation that Sony did seven years ago. DRM or no DRM.

Dubious Quality: Holy Cow

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I don't know that I'd categorize it a win for MS as much as it is a win for consumers.

Of course you don't. Sony could literally take a shit in the box and ship it out while Microsoft packed their console with a solid gold bar and you'd still not categorize it as a win. Do you know how fucking pathetic your posts look? You're a grown man for christ sake.

[SirFozzie]

SackAttack and I discuss the issues out of E3, sexism/misogny in the video games industry and amongst gamers, Independent games, and the big reversal of Xbox One.

8 bit mind in a 64 Bit World: Interview with Josh Allen of Gamenikk in Exile: Sexism, Independents, and Xbox One DRM Reversal

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I still don't trust them not to put the always online and DRM in later on down the line once the userbase is established.

I think that would be shady as hell and don't see them doing that. It really doesn't benefit them much years down the road as it would have up front. I think it'll now come down to the game publishers as to what they want to do.

It seems now that the major difference is the $100 price. That is still a big difference unless you're one of the people into Kinect. I think Kinect technology is really cool, I just don't think I'd have a use for it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Of course you don't. Sony could literally take a shit in the box and ship it out while Microsoft packed their console with a solid gold bar and you'd still not categorize it as a win. Do you know how fucking pathetic your posts look? You're a grown man for christ sake.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It seems now that the major difference is the $100 price. That is still a big difference unless you're one of the people into Kinect. I think Kinect technology is really cool, I just don't think I'd have a use for it.

Well that was fun. Take a shot at me in reference to my post and then agree with the exact point I made. Good times.

[RainMaker]

I'm talking about how you act in the entire thread. It's like how an 11 year old boy would treat a topic.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm talking about how you act in the entire thread. It's like how an 11 year old boy would treat a topic.

I'll just agree to disagree and say that I respect others opinions even if they differ from my own.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I don't know that I'd categorize it a win for MS as much as it is a win for consumers. They voted with their wallets and MS had to make the move to avoid 6-7 years of big problems. You're correct that Sony did not respond well, but I think it was a much different situation. It was a price situation more than anything. MS still faces that issue in this generation. If they think their fight is over and all is roses again, they still have blinders on. If anything, they're back to the same position where Sony was in the last generation.

As Bill Harris noted in his blog on the situation, they still are trying to sell the consumer on the 'value' of their console and why consumers should pay $100 more for that console. They need to change their focus on the sales pitch or they're going to end up in the same situation that Sony did seven years ago. DRM or no DRM.

Dubious Quality: Holy Cow

Sony touted the BluRay drive at a time most people did not care about it. Keep in mind too that not only was the XBox priced cheaper, it had a decent library of games for it as well. So Sony priced themselves out quickly.

XBox now? They can come up with all sorts of pricing schemes to make up the 100 dollars. They could drop the Kinect, they could give a year or two of Live free, they could bundle another controller or game.

If you read what I wrote above, I did not say the xbox had won. I said they were back in the game. They are. And they will be no matter hw many people want to state otherwise.