Instead of making the Kinect 2 mandatory Microsoft should be proving incentive for consumers to want to purchase it, if we saw a "genuine" presentation that actually showed off Kinect 2 giving us a proper Minority Report experience and a few games that support the Kinect 2 showing us how it actually makes them better instead of twice as bad and/or near unplayable, then I'd probably be on board instead of on the fence.
Why the hell not just release an Xbox One without the Kinect 2?
Like many others I have absolutely no interest in anything Kinect related, so in bundling the Xbox One along with it they are loosing out on potential sales.
Says the person with the DmC Icon.
Indeed, but it's nothing we didn't already suspect. still, I can't help but get a little depressed about it.
I actually made a little indie game for the XBLA with my brother, it was a pretty decent service other than the bloody mods.
Anyway, you make some valid points but one other thing to consider is what additional benefits or restriction might Microsoft put in place. The people getting excited need to calm down, it's still way too early to know anything for sure
No, because the argument is stupid and has been from the beginning.
The Wii U IS a next gen console, it's Nintendo's latest console that simply could not have been developed "last gen" which therefore makes it "next gen" no matter how underpowered some gamers may claim it to be this is a fact.
I agree, but time will tell whether or not Nintendo made the right choice.
Oh yeah, this. Modern warfare meets ancient Rome.
The game trailer for Ryse: Son of Rome honestly failed to impress me, the graphics are good but the gameplay seems to emphasise pretty much everything that's wrong with AAA gaming.
So can we move on from this argument now?
Speaking as huge mech nerd I'm pretty sure I'd get my moneys worth at least. I'd much rather games that offer something new like Titanfall be developed instead of just the annual slew of tired, generic modern FPS's.
Not sure I ever heard anyone say HD gaming is a "bad idea" but I guess back then HD TVs weren't such a prominent household item.
Digital gaming on the other hand is more varied in it's potential to do good or ill, Steam may have found success but Valve worked hard and created incentive for consumers to not care so much about actually owning a physical copy, where as in the console scene we still have old digital games being sold at full price while their phy...
Thanks for commenting.
Well the chance that history does repeat itself is all too likely as far as I'm concerned, and that is one of my main reasons for me not wanting to purchases the Xbox One. If in the end you do decide to let Microsoft new console pass you by then I completely respect your decision to do so, as you obviously keep yourself well informed in regards to your purchases.
Also, thank you for understanding why I'm still on the fence when ...
Digitally distributed games are definitely the future, it's more beneficial than disc based gaming and you can have your game with you mere hours after it's released.
However there is also the issue of ownership, with digital games we can no longer trade our games in for cash back and in store credit, or trade between family and friends, not to mention the fact that we're still being forced to pay the price for a brand new hard copy sitting on the shelves.
...
It is a cause for concern, there's been many supposed Xbox exclusives that have ended up finding their way over to the competition.
My view? I think there's two possible future outcomes. Either the cost of developing AAA games is going to increase by such that it becomes near impossible for publishers to have their game exclusive to one console, or the difference in power between that of the PS4 and the Xbox One may force developers to stick exclusively with Sony, or ...
Thanks for commenting.
Pretty much yeah. Sony certainly made a few mistakes with the PS3 early on but they managed to make up for it later down the line, so it is possible Microsoft could do the same.
I think Microsoft's ambition to be at the head of "all in one multimedia entertainment" got the best of them and ended up back firing, they tried to enforce unnecessary restrictions in the name of new features that could be seen by some as detrimen...
Sounds like they could do with another "Final Fantasy" a truely great one like the one that saved them from bankruptcy years ago.
I get what you're saying, but honestly that pick even creeps me out haha.
This is what gets me with Xbox Live, if they're going to throw ads at us anyway then why make us pay? one or the other please.
They thought mobile gamers would go for it based on the positive response the console was getting, but honestly I don't think mobile gamers are the kind of people who'd really want to play a home console.
Is this really all that surprising? expecting a home console that exclusive plays games designed for a mobile phone to be popular was kind of asking a bit much IMO.
Mobile gamers are a different breed from console gamers, they want a quick pick up and play option that they can work around their busy schedule, the Ouya is a neat idea but possibly a little ahead of it's time.
I know this, but why in the world would a company be so obnoxious as to design a console that is unusable without a peripheral most gamers don't even want in the first place?
I'll tell you why, because Microsoft knows the original Kinect failed to appeal to core gamers so they are making sure every one of their consumers has one, so they can justify pushing Kinect support and it's features further in their future titles.