Add to the fact they brought the Commander position back (i.e. Battlefield 2)? I'm sold as well.
I think you just got the knowledge bomb dropped on you there Eden. It's funny how 360 fans with blinders on keep spouting this 'more exclusives' stuff because of what MS showed at E3, yet seem to forget what has been happening all this time. MS isn't going to suddenly change it's stripes, despite of what was shown at E3, they just want you to buy their product. They spend the most money in advertising and endorsements, and they're good at getting you to blindly buy ...
lol, nice try evil, trying to spin them numbers. You should work in the media!
@Stryfeno2
Translation: Apple does it and makes a killing ($$$), why can't we?
Now there is no advantage to owning an Xbox.
If you haven't pre-ordered one yet, get on it. They are running out like hot cakes. I've pre-ordered mines (for the guarantee) then will, of course, get a sale bundle come Turkey Time or Santa Time, depending on the actual release. Hopefully they'll have those available.
@Mika
If Kinect was is the reason why not show it at E3? If XB1 is so freaking advanced with Kinect, why did they use HP desktop systems with GTX 700 cards instead of the real deal? This flip-flop defense you Microsoft die-hards keep using is getting ridiculous. Oh because E3 was for the hardcore. Oh the reveal was for the casual. DRM is built in, but it's up to the developers. I'm a hardcore gamer but HBO Go is so cool, but when the PS3 was touted as a multimed...
Because no self-respecting PC gamers is going to pay for a Live membership to play a multi-player shooter PC game online, pure and simple. Developers won't dare make it a Live-only game, because then it just wouldn't sell. Us PC shooters would just play BF4 or CoD (really) then buy a subscription on top of paying for the game just to play Titanfall.
They tried it before (beta testing) with Halo and the console folks kept getting slaughtered in multiplayer. No offense to console FPS gamers (I'm pretty decent myself on consoles), but the shooter was born on the PC.
I said it before and I'll say it again. Microsoft will end up changing their policy. The game sales will stink if only a few people need to buy a game and then rest can share the library with up to 10 people. That's just a dumb business model. I believe that's why, at this point, it's still not very clear on how exactly this is going to work. They want folks to buy the consoles first before you realize the true restrictions to 'game library sharing'.
@Mike
Then when what's the point of owning an Xbox? Just stick to PC. It's already doing DRM like the Xbox is, so why is Microsoft trying to force it on the console as well? Sharing libraries is a cool feature, but how will that affect game sales? How do you think developers will react when they realize that each copy sold could potentially be 1/10 of what it should be? Why buy more when you can share your copy with 10 people? The irony is, it's just like pi...
No thanks EA, DRM on the PC is enough for me. I'll stick to the PS4 for my console fix.
Oh, and at least Sony said they're looking into backwards compatibility by using emulation and Gaikai cloud streaming. Microsoft flat out said no.
Microsoft is still speculating on the details on how buying/selling/trading games is going to work, if at all. Especially on the fees part. The Xbox was made with DRM built in, the PS4 was not, so good luck with that. Your internet never went out, but those who don't have internet or whose internet goes out, can't play some Xbox. How shitty is that? And investing more money does not mean you'll get more great 1st party exclusives. When was the last great 1st party exclusive ...
The real problem is game sales. Why buy games if only one few needs to buy them and the rest can share? You see now why Microsoft is so tight lipped about the whole deal? As a developer, knowing that you probably won't sell as many copies as you possible can because MS has enabled folks to share every copy with 10 people, would you continue support for that platform? That's like pirating copies, this sharing feature. Why would I bother to buy games, if I can just use my die hard ...
Like the ability to buy and sell used games? Or play offline? Or sharing games with more than 10 people? The possibility of backwards compatibility? A diverse group of in-house developers? Maybe you should do your homework?
I think it's because when you're not given any options but forced to do it their way and deal with it, that's when you're branded a sheep. All the restrictions plus a higher price tag? And any of the good points about the systems don't quite make up for the taking away of consumer freedoms. Outside of Kinect 2.0, the PC and the PS4 can do what the X Box can. And I can see Microsoft porting the Kinect over to the PC. So why even buy Xbox?
Here's my rebuttal:
This sharing stuff, is going to bite them in the ass when it comes to game sales. Why? Why would I buy a games if we can just share libraries? Imagine, only one game needs to be bought, then everyone can play it, no need to buy more copies. So instead of 10 folks buying the same game, only one needs to. That's the downside to this digital sharing. Sure, you can long distance share, but they'll see their bottom line won't be what it us...
What I don't understand is why there is no reporting function built in. The game seems like such a half-ass job where they put more effort into the advertising and hype then they did in game development.
Why does it even matter anymore? Get over it already.