If a 'games with lite media and no Kinect' XB1 SKU released, I'd definitely buy it. Unfortunately, I live in a market where the XB1's media offerings don't matter, so an XB1 Lite would give the gaming experience I'd want from MS.
I still have hope that they might release something like that down the line.
I want actual, official, info on the consoles' prices, used game policies, camera connectivity, etc. All the speculation on what the PS4 and XB1 will/won't require needs to end.
I'm expecting epic game reveals by both Sony and MS. Now is the time to shine, if they want gamers to spend those dollars at launch. And who knows? Both may have some surprises, too. ;)
Either way, it'll be like Christmas for gamers.
If the PS4's camera isn't optional, I won't be buying one.
Maybe MS will bombard Sony with 5 billion transistors....
I've always enjoyed the added multimedia features of PlayStation consoles, but they're a bonus to me. In earlier generations, they'd tide me over until the format became mainstream enough to make dedicated players cheap.
I'm sure I'd use the streaming capabilities of the PS4, since it would allow me to stream to my TV without hooking up my laptop, but I'm more concerned with whether or not the PS Eye will be an integrated, mandatory part of the system....
Actually, multimedia has always been part of Vita. I, for one, enjoy watching YouTube and Netflix vids on its gorgeous screen and checking my gmail with the Gmail app, in addition to playing games on it.
Games are the main focus of Vita, but it's a robust media platform as well.
The PS2 for me. The sheer scope of its game library was epic.
Shin Megami Tensei IV is the only reason I need to buy a 3DS.
Tablets and smartphones are irrelevant to me, as a gamer, since my laptop fills my casual gaming needs, and neither tablets or smartphones have compelling gaming libraries.
Until such time as they do, consoles and PCs are the only relevant game platforms for me.
What I find hilarious is how, at the beginning of the PS3/360 gen, the PS3 was slammed by some as not being a gaming console but rather a Blu-Ray player. Now, with MS' new, broader, focus on non-gaming entertainment, this approach is being hailed as a good thing. By the same token, some people touted the PS3's multimedia capabilities at launch, and now that the XB1 has expanded its focus, those features are a bad thing.
Goal post moving at its finest, and it's one...
PS4 ---->WiiU for me.
As for XB1, I don't live in the States, so I have no interest in a set-top box that won't give me the same digital content access as U.S. owners will have and has a secondary focus on games. That's not even taking into account my issues with the integrated Kinect and the whole used games/24 hr online check in aspects of the system.
I doubt it, considering how the TV integration and functionality MS has emphasized with the XB1 will only be fully available in the U.S. International licensing and digital distribution agreements take ages to work out. For example, we here in Canada have had Netflix for a couple of years, yet it only offers us a tiny fraction of the content available to U.S. subscribers. And we're on the same continent.
I have no doubt the XB1 will sell, but there's a different betwe...
I hope Sony doesn't decide to go down a similar route. If it does, this current gen will by my last.
You've brought up an interesting point. The way we consume entertainment has fundamentally changed over the last 30 years. We've become a much more 'on demand' culture, watching TV shows and movies when and where we want, rather than gathering around the TV set and watching them when they're broadcast. It would be interesting to see the percentage of people who view streaming video rather than traditional TV.
Guess I'm not a "real" gamer then, since I won't buy a set-top box with TV features I won't be able to use just to use its secondary gaming functionality.
I wonder if the backlash will die down by E3. Either way, it should be an interesting show. As I see it, Sony and MS are offering two very different gaming experiences targeted to different types of gamers.
X1 targets the gamers who game as a hobby and prefer specific titles (the EA Sports titles, COD, etc). These people are just as, or if not more, interested in non-gaming entertainment, such as sports and TV.
PS4, on the other hand, is meant for the 'ha...
That's an important flaw in MS' 'all-in-one box' strategy, and one that certainly should be stressed by media outside the U.S. Simply put, the TV aspects of X1 are immaterial outside of the States. Heck, I live in Canada, on the same bloody continent, and our content licensing laws prevent us from having anything near the same amount of content found on the U.S. version of Netflix on Netflix.ca.
MS can emphasize the TV content all they want. I won't pay mo...
What a crock. I've never been an "outcast but not doubted." The author should make such generalized statements. It's that kind of poor writing that has made the non-issue of gamer gender into the ridiculous trope it is today.
X1's problem is that it's trying to be an all-round entertainment device that plays games rather than a game console, and that approach may alienate gamers regardless of gender.
The major problem it has is it's lack of international appeal. MS has branded the XBox One as a home entertainment hub, touting its TV features, etc. But those TV features are US-only. Canada is on the same continent, and yet our media licensing rules are so draconian that we have one-tenth the Netflix selection of the U.S. market. Never mind the situation in Europe.
So, unless MS has plans to offer a 'stripped down' version of the console that basically just play...
Unfortunately, those of us who live outside the U.S. won't get the benefit of this 'added functionality.' We won't get the same TV integration, for example. So we end up paying more for a console that does less.
I see where you're coming from, but plenty of people bought the PS1 and PS2 but skipped PS3. Consumers can be fickle like that.
Though both PS4 and XB1 will sell millions.