Sounds good to me. According to that, the online requirement is exactly the same as the PS4 - entirely up to the publisher of the particular game to decide. I personally can't wait to see the new Live features.
Printable View
Sounds good to me. According to that, the online requirement is exactly the same as the PS4 - entirely up to the publisher of the particular game to decide. I personally can't wait to see the new Live features.
X-Box Infinity to have touch controller
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10797_3-57582004-235/will-the-next-xbox-be-called-xbox-infinity/
I really wish all this touch screen, Kinect, motion control, etc... would just die already.
the touch screen crap won't die because people love to have it on the phones etc so the gamers want to have it as well. It 's a big fad.
Yes, fad. It's fine for navigating a user interface on something like a phone or tablet, but that's it. No one wants it in their console gaming, and no one wants it in their PC gaming(ask Microsoft how their Windows 8 OS is selling if you want proof of that).Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorfanStovy
The sooner this Move/Kinect/Illumiroom/whatever else crap dies, the better.
Yeah, I love touchscreen on my phone. It's much simpler, much easier, much more user-friendly than having to sit there pressing arrows a bunch of times on a keypad to get what I want highlighted and selected.
On a game controller? Fuck that. Give me something along the lines of the 360 controller and I'll be perfectly happy.
For what it's worth, I LOVE having a touchscreen on my Wii U.
The problem with touchscreen isn't the fact that it's there. The problem is NO game uses it in a way that actually makes the gaming experience better.
Zombie U, Madden 13, and NintendoLand all disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
Touchscreen and touchpad are also two totally different things.
Touchscreen I can see the benefit of in a game... think picking a play in a football game or something similar.
Touchpad, I see very little benefit for it other than how it's used on a laptop to control a mouse pointer.
This, I agree with.Quote:
Originally Posted by gschwendt
An internal Microsoft memo reportedly debunks the always-online Xbox rumor: http://go.ign.com/18NHts9
Interesting. Who knows at this point. Of course, the e-mail may just be one employee's argument/idea against any "always online"/"#dealwithit" ideas that may or may not have been previously included.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
At this point MS would be DUMB to go that route but maybe they think they have stronger brand loyalty than I do in the States.
Though there is no way I'm going to do both systems at launch. $300 + a 2-year contract at $15 per month; which INCLUDES Live is a nice deal. Maybe by the time I'm ready for both next gen systems it'll be $250 + $15/mo or something.
$660 instead of ~$500 (~$400 for the console and $50 a year for Live) seems insane to me. :smh:Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Then again, paying for access to a place that's main attraction also requires extra money is also insane to me.
But the key thing is you don't have to drop it all down at once.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
How is paying for Live for features you can't get anywhere else insane? I guess I could believe that if it was a lot more expensive, but $40 or $50 a year... that's a truly minimum fee to pay for a service that you enjoy and use every day.
...and while I'll personally buy the thing outright if I decide to get one, I can see why people would elect to spend $600 over a period of 2 years rather than dropping $500 all at once. It's not something I would do, but there's a benefit to it.
Personally, I've been hoarding Amazon credit for the past year, so I'm really hoping I'll be able to buy both and not spend a cent of my actual money. If they're both going to be priced around $400, I should be close by the time they release.
Was going to post this a few weeks ago, but considering it claimed there would be no online requirement during a time in which it seemed as though there would be, I just wrote it off as fake. However, may be something to speculate over now.
SourceQuote:
So yes, I originally made a post on pastebin that I then posted on IGN that has now mysteriously vanished from the internet. I’m guessing good ‘ol Don wasn’t too happy.
In that pastebin post I said I wouldn’t be saying anything else, but that was before a few things changed. So yeah…. #dealwithit.
That IGN post (that referenced the pastebin post) was also posted on NeoGAF. Though it didn’t get much attention.
In that pastebin post I specifically mentioned that I was a GAF member, but that I would not be outing myself on GAF for fear of losing my job. And I still will not be doing that. I’m not an idiot.
However since the reveal is pretty close now, I thought I’d just come out and tell you everything I know. No more cryptic bullshit, just facts.
First of all, for any of the GAF members reading this (or anyone else for that matter) that actually believed the online-required rumor, well…. you’re either stupid, very gullible, or a fanboy. Reading the posts some of you made over the past few weeks leads me to believe that mostly fanboyism was involved. So, I’ll make this very clear:
You are not required to be connected to the internet in order to play Durango games and MS were NEVER considering doing such a thing. Now please, just read that last sentence over and over again until it sinks in. Done? Good.
Now that I’ve got that out of the way I can talk about the real details.
First, I’ll admit some things that I originally hinted at in the first pastebin are now not going to happen. Mainly the April 18th date (obviously) and the HMD glasses. The date, as you may know by now was pushed back to May, and the glasses, well, although they’re kind of working are going to spend a bit longer in the oven.
Ok, moving on. Have you read the VGLeaks article about the Durango specs? Yes? Good because everything you read in that article was 100% correct. Except, for one tiny little detail that MS kept guarded from most devs until very recently. That detail being that every Durango ships with a Xbox 360 SOC.
There was a reason why MS hired so many former IBM and AMD employees. I’ll admit I’m not an electrical engineer (I’m in software) so I won’t pretend to know the ins and outs of how the 360 SOC integrates into the Durango motherboard. All I know, and all I need to know about this new change is that I (or a game dev) can use the 360 SOC in parallel with the original Durango hardware.
What does this mean in basic terms? Well, apart from Durango having 100% BC with the 360, it also increases Durango’s processing power a fair amount.
Ok, so what else?
Kinect 2.0: – Again the specs from VGLeaks are correct, there’s been no change and there won’t be. However, the fact is, is that software can do ANYTHING, and with the quite substantial increase in the hardware over Kinect 1.0, any humanly noticeable lag should be gone
Controller: – The controller is pretty much the same. The D-Pad has been improved, but the change will only be noticeable when actually using it, i.e. it looks exactly the same, I haven’t actually touched it, this is just what I’ve been told. AA batteries will make a return, but the new wireless tech MS has created for the controller, improves battery life by 16%. Again, this is just what the doc says.
Xbox Mini/Xbox TV: Yes, this is happening, although as far as I know, it’s a whole different team over at MS that are handling this. As has been reported its main purpose is to compete with Apple TV, so expect this thing to be small and around $100.
It contains the 360 SOC (similar to the one in the Durango), however no disc drive is included (to decrease size). But of course you can still play any XBLA/Games on Demand game. That’s all I really know about the xTV so I’ll leave it at that. Thurrott seems to know more than anyone else about this, so go ask him.
OS/Services: I wish I knew more about this, but I honestly don’t. I have no clue what sort of new ideas MS are going to bring to the table this gen, but I’m certainly expecting them to amaze.
The only thing that I do know for definite is that Durango will be running Windows 8. It will essentially be the full version of the OS, minus the desktop side of things. This means it’ll be running the new WinRT framework, which as a side effect also means that contrary to popular belief MS will be the most indie friendly of all the big 3 next gen.
This is because any app/game that is created for the Windows app store will (after adding controller support of course) be playable on Durango.
In other words, any random person worldwide can pay Microsoft a $60 license fee (for the Windows Store) and submit their app/game to the store where millions of people can then download/buy it. No expensive development kits needed.
Expect to hear much more on WinRT – Durango at Build2013.
Ok, so that’s pretty much it. I wish I had more info on specific games and services that MS have lined up, but it seems that even I’ll have to wait until May to find out.
I’ll look forward to this post appearing on GAF, where rest assured I’ll be lurking. Hell, who knows I may even make a few posts.
I wonder how many people will refuse to believe this? Hmmmm….
If this turns out to be true and it's 100% backwards compatible with 360 titles, that's a massive blow right out of the gate to Sony. I'm still a little hesitant to believe it, but I guess we'll find out in 2 weeks.
Yeah unless I read that huge block quote wrong he seems to be referring to a "720" gaming console and a "mini"/entertainment only unit. I've read several other rumors/reports that MS long ago went away from that idea. Who knows time will tell. I've seen/read NOTHING that would force me to switch from a PS4 to a 720.
I'm only getting one and unless the cable thing is basically free/cheap full blown cable t.v. to beat my current provider I'm not interested in some sort of "add on" to my current T.V. DVR setup.
He mentioned the Apple TV competitor device, but from what he said, that has nothing to do with the Xbox console itself. I've read another rumor that said the mini-box somehow hooked into the actual 720, and it provided backwards compatibility that way. In this article, he states there's supposedly a 360 chip built inside the main device that will allow 100% backwards compatibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
I don't think that's a feature that's necessarily there to get people to switch consoles. Backwards compatibility with the prior console is a feature meant to keep the customers you already have. I have close to 100 360 games sitting here, so there's no doubt having backwards compatibility would automatically get me to buy the Next Xbox on launch day. It would also lead to higher day one sales as people would be willing to ditch their 360, keep the games, and then upgrade to the 720. Keep your games, play on a new console.
For the record, I'm not interested in any of their TV service offerings. I buy a console for the games and the online features involved with games. The system that has the best games, best user interface, and the best online features gets my money. I'll probably end up with both eventually, but those 3 things are what determines which one I buy first. This cable TV, music, Kinect/Move, and all that other garbage doesn't interest me at all.
Nearly 50% of the people that buy Live use it for Netflix than any other way of watching Netflix. It's insanity to me to pay $50 as well as another $10 for Netflix streaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Yes, but I have to assume that they don't pay for Live just to watch Netflix. Who would be that stupid? I pay for Live and I watch Netflix, but I don't even consider Netflix being part of the subscription. I consider my $40 a year to go to the ability to cross game chat and use parties.
But, if anyone out there pays $40 or $50 a year for Live JUST to watch Netflix, then I'll agree with you, that's insane. There's multiple other options out there that allow you to stream Netflix for no additional cost, so again, it would be highly stupid of someone to pay for Live just to use Netflix. I just hope there's no one out there that dumb.
I have several friends that do that for their parents because it's easier than doing it through their computer.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Well, that's just ridiculous. Again, $40 or $50 a year really isn't that much, but if you're not using the online features for Xbox, I don't see the point. Especially you can just pay the standard Netflix fee and then get something like a Roku and watch it at no additional charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
This is why "Always Online" is a bad idea:
http://youtu.be/rwUIP-R63vM
You get what you paid for :D
I'm really hoping they do go with Always Online and I really do hope COD (or some other HUGE title) cannot handle the server load just to see the mobs of angry 12 year olds screaming profanities and crying on the Youtubes. :nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
In the case of a title as massive as Call of Duty, if it's always online on the next Xbox, it's 100% guaranteed it'll be online required for the PS4 as well. Let's not forget that Sony didn't say "there is no online requirement," but rather, said it was up to the publisher of each title to decide if that will be a requirement. I'd imagine the next Xbox will be set up the same way. On multiplatform titles, if it requires online access on one system, it'll require it on the other, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
But as for your scenario, it's bound to happen. It doesn't even have to have an online requirement. At least once a month something goes wrong with the "servers" on Call of Duty and people are losing their minds.
Nothing will ever top the PS3 hacking meltdown a few years ago, though. Watching people bitch and complain about that was one of the funniest things I've ever read on the internet. Of course, if I didn't have a 360 to play at the time, I probably wouldn't have found it as funny. :D
It was a complete mess. I loved the first one but two days in I could not connect with the server. I finally got to play once and then removed it from my hard drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Speculation abounds about the name of Microsoft’s next-generation Xbox, set to be revealed on May 21st. Will it be called Xbox 720? How about its codename, Durango? Will it be called just Xbox? Or how about Xbox Infinity?
According to sources speaking with The International Business Times, it’s the latter moniker – Xbox Infinity – that’s the name of Microsoft’s third console. “Sources related to development of the new Xbox have confirmed to IBTimes UK that the console… will be called Infinity,” the article states.
The article also states that developers have next Xbox development kits, a given considering the console is likely to launch in fewer than six months.
While this information is still unconfirmed by Microsoft – it’s unlikely we’ll have any solid confirmation before the 21st – rumors have long swirled that the next Xbox may be called Loop, or perhaps even Fusion. It may even be called Xbox 8, likely in reference to the Windows 8 operating system.
Courtesy: IGN
Xbox Infinity? :fp:
And beyond!Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
Better than Fusion, but still shitty. Why not just name it Xbox?
XBOX Lunch
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Just name xbox 720 already and be done. It is that hard Microsoft ?
Always thought calling it the 720 would be kind of odd. Would you expect them to call the system after that the Xbox 1440 and so on? Sony has it right just giving it the next number, MS just wants to be the hipster doofus and try to give it some catchy name. All of which are better than naming your system the WiiU.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorfanStovy
no not odd just logical imo. keep the numbers going . no need for a fancy name. true gaming fans won't care.Quote:
Originally Posted by bdoughty
Listened to the IGN Playstation Podcast last night and they all seemed to think that Microsoft has something "BIG!" in store for the 720. Their thoughts/theories/speculation included:
- HEAVILY subsidized price point - i.e. like a cell phone - pay $200 for the console but require a monthly contract for service ($15-$20/mo) with a 2 year agreement
- Some sort of "new" earth shattering/ground breaking way incorporating all forms of entertainment into a single box - DVR; Cable; Windows 8/PC; phone calls; etc.....
- Incorporating Kinect 2.0 into above making everything voice controlled enabled
- That crazy thing I've seen elsewhere that MS is working on that turns your entire wall in front of you into the screen.
Any thoughts/predictions?
For me none of the above matters its all about games to me. I don't "get" why it's great to go all entertainment where right now I simply can switch from my gaming console to cable dvr by a simple press of one button on a remote.
I predict that MS will also not require Always Online (they might let developers do it) but after the heat/back lash they faced I don't think MS is stupid enough to go that route.
I suppose the ONLY thing that might make me pause is if MS got some HUGE coup for exclusives (Say EA will ONLY produce games on the 720) and Sony had no immediate plans to replace that niche in the market with either another 3rd party studio or their own studio. (honestly I'd love to see if Sony could make a football game since San Diego has practically nailed baseball).
It's almost guaranteed that that is going to happen. EVERYTHING anyone inside as seen is it's going to equal out to ~$600 over the 2 year period for the console and Xbox Live subscription on their base setup (~$250 for the console and $15 a month basically).Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
I just simply don't see that happening. So many things that they'd have to get subsidies for. That's a SIGNIFICANT amount of money that Microsoft would have to shell out in the front of the console (combined with the INCREDIBLY large cost of the system initially).Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Seems likely that they could possibly go the Wii route and make it a pivotal input device for the system, but I don't think they'll be that stupid. The backlash would be ginormous from the hardcore gaming community.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
That's just dumb. No one wants to play like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW