Yesterday Microsoft Corporate Vice President for Windows and Devices Marketing Yusuf Mehdi spoke at the Credit Suisse Technology Broker Conference, and talked about the performance of Xbox this year, next year’s lineup, and the outlook for Xbox Live across consoles and Windows 10.
Among them are the potential that lies within their HoloLens technology
No one wants to touch it. Everyone else is going for something greater and better.
Lmao I was thinking this when coming into the topic. Honestly I think the tech is cool but as its own thing separate from video games.
Pretty much, I don't see myself gaming with it... could be useful in other areas though. VR is the thing I want to game with, especially immersive games like Elder Scrolls or Fallout.
I can see HoloLens one day merging AR and VR into one device simply by completely covering the field of view with AR.
Once we get the device small enough, HoloLens can go with you to everywhere you go. It can replace your mobile phone and be much more convenient too especially with Cortana!
The next 10-years in computing is going to be very exciting.
Donthate has a point, the combination would be spectacular. Hololens is too expensive in its current form, but throw that and VR together? Done, bought, first day. That said, any other VR companies could do that with the use of 3 cameras or 2 lighthouses, something multiple companies have products made for. Wouldn't be a patent breach and is just software that that point. Hopefully developers figure it out first and keep it open to everyone ;)
The Hololens is simply augmented reality attached to your face. Almost every console from PS3 to 3DS has tried to implement a gaming experience into augmented reality and failed. If Nintendo, of all people, could not succeed, Microsoft likely won't either.
@nX
You don't see yourself gaming with it because you can't judging by all your anti Xbox One MS comment history.
The fact that for a single person, or even someone that is not single, the ability to not having to or wanting to upgrade your t.v every couple of years this is a winner right there.
100 inch t.v screen on any wall you like - priceless. No cables no drilling no brackets - nothing.
hololens could indeed have an incredible future.
Hololens will excel in the fact that it will do more than gaming. When putting it up against Vr for gaming purposes it falls short. When broadening it's use to every day life applications then you can easily see the potential for this thing. I'm more excited for the non-gaming things I'll be able to do. Gaming on this will be pretty casual so when it comes to that aspect of it I'm not so thrilled
Hololens will be awesome for stuff outside of gaming. I mean it's awesome tech and hopefully someday i'll find something can personally use it for.
I don't think gaming on HoloLens will necessarily be casual, because it depends on what you are making and if you can receive the inputs of a controller.
Overall it is just too soon to tell, but it is possible that HoloLens in the future will be both an AR and VR device when the field of view can be completely covered with AR.
Gaming is, and has been for quite some time, about immersion. Immersion IS about taking you out of reality and putting you in the game world. Immersion IS NOT taking the game world out of the TV and putting it on your coffee table. Microsoft isn't pushing Hololens as a gaming device because even they know its applications in that field are limited at best. In the commerical and industrial worlds, it can be a game changer though.
@dboy
Or the opposite because it will not have much to do with gaming. Like Kinect had many applications outside of gaming, and ultimately failed to do anything as a result.
Indie games will fly to this device, how many indie games are on pc's tablet's and mobile phones, but I too am looking forward to the non-gaming options, movies for one.
Why couldn't Hololens also be VR? All it would take is an extra peice of plastic to block out the environment around you.
I still wouldnt want to play a game where the level was my living room, and the whole game was as big as my house, even if Sony did it.
It probably would not do well, just like the move controllers and kinect.
They already kinda did with Vita. The main difference being Vita doesn't strap to your face.
But otherwise it got quite a few uses in the AR world.
It still wouldn't really be a gaming peripherals, so nothing would change for me, I think the tech is really cool, but I'd have no use for it, I'm sure companies will though, and others.
Saying that I also don't really care for VR either, besides that multiplayer Mech game, non have really interested me.
Speak for your self fanboy. I would react the same way but the way you fanboys act like everything is against you and then act innocent is stupid and obvious, same goes for sony fanboys. These topics have an opinion aspect , not every sony fan will act the same.
I didn't like how sony supported the vita and i did talk against sony in the same year they released the vita and i got tons of disagrees, those that saw reality agreed with me but fanboys really proved themselfs at that point now the ones that disagreed are doing what i did. Many people who like sony products do the same as me. I don't care about sony , i care about what i will get.
I am still doubting VR which is focused on games let alone something that is not related to games. All i care about is a better but reasonable experience for gaming. VR sounds promising yet needs to prove it self before i support it or claim anything. As for AR , i am sure a billion% that if anyone bought it for gaming will be disappointed just like what happened to kinect. This is not a feature , this is an expensive device, gaming so far use it as an extra feature because it's hard to come up with something creative and practical in the same time.
What do you mean by greater and better? There's no other tech out there that's producing holographic images through nothing but glass. So what's competing with it?
No one wants to touch it? The top 3 companies in the world.
1.Apple
2.Microsoft
3.Google
All are working on AR.
I'm going to get one of them when the price drops after they're all released, definitely won't be buying Apple, but AR could change business, laptops and and education if they mass market and produce it to them. This thing + AutoCAD O_O
Well when you can combine both, its pretty darn Awesome
http://www.gizmag.com/sulon...
I think everyone agrees that it is very impressive technology (much like Kinect), really future is now stuff (much like Kinect), with many implications to real world industry, but not really useful for gaming (much like Kinect).
Kinect never got a chance to be explored in gaming. For instance, Xbox Fitness gamified fitness at home and is a huge leap forward.
Other games that have come that are great include Fantasia, Dance Central, Fruit Ninja Kinect, D4 and so on.
There is still a lot of potential there, but the naysayers killed Kinect!
Naysayers? If the product was good then the haters wouldnt really have a leg to stand on. Two iterations of Kinect and the best part of a decade since it came out and still no one has proved how it came better real core gaming experiences in any meaningful way. Thats not naysayers, thats just reality.
Devs had plenty of time to produce a real game on it, it never happened. All they showed is that its good for dance games or punching balls away, not real games that real gamers want to play. You cant blame naysayers for that and its a long way from the bold promises of changing gaming that MS went on and on about.
Im yet to be convinced Hololens can be used well in gaming. Like I said its impressive tech with possibly a million uses. It could very well change society the way smart phones have. But gaming? Some one tell me how, please. I dont want a level that is my house. It sounds very limiting.
Even the on stage demo of that guy shooting aliens looked cool, but really the way he was ducking slowly away from even slower fire and plodding around the stage, after that initial shock value of an alien in your living room wears off, will that sort of simple gameplay be enough for todays MP centric twitch shooters gamers?
I think VR definitely has a lot to add to gaming as it can immerse you right in the game and block out the world. I dont think AR with its bringing the game into the world approach has much to offer gaming. Buy hey, if a game comes out that proves me wrong I will happily admit it and buy one.
Kinect will really shine once vr takes off. Think about it, the real world gets blocked off and now you are inside the gameworld. The gamepad/keyboard and mouse will become useless. Kinect works in vr due to body movement. So be able to move in a gameworld using your body will truly change the way we play games. I can't wait till vr reaches sword art online status
Cool technology, but I don't think gamer's want something that equates to something like a secondary experience, so far I have not seen any real control type game play done with it. It's just a more elaborate secondary screen type of thing, not literally but similar in what it can offer to games. The price for it will probably be more than most would want to pay for that experience.
It's more suited to educational purposes.
RTS, basically able to have full view of the map and order troops to go forward. Be able to spot the enemy from miles away. Have a virtual chat with your rival or the nation leaders you want to conquer. It could also bring the star wars: a new hope chess game to life. I do want to emphasize that its real strength comes outside of gaming.
Care to elaborate? Comparing VR tech to Hololens is like comparing a calculator to a PC.
Wrong wrong, wrong, and wrong. @Captain wormy
Good luck with greater and better
Firstly this technology is not for gaming, it was not created for gaming, it was created to do whatever the application is on the device, app's run everything and if a game is made for it so be it, this device is created to be a multitasking unit, I for one can't wait to be sitting on one of my long journey to work or home and just watch a movie on the go full surround sound, also since most of you haters of MS, saying games this and games that, just imagine a Bluetooth connection between your mobile phone or mini tablet to this device, your phone or tablet being the controller, you can adjust the size of the screen to suit yourself, I play Dungeon Hunter(V) on my tablet everywhere, now this is just app, so why can't it be possible on this device that was never intended to focus on games. Can you take VR on the road, are you free to move about with VR, NO you can't, don't get me wrong I can't wait to see what the gaming industry do with VR, but HOLOLENS, I don't see them pushing it, but I do see indie games making a big bang with, on the move big screen gaming, this device is a multitasker like your PC/MAC,and TABLETS, If pushed and marketed correctly you would see this more common place, it may look silly to ware out on the streets, but when people start to ware, depending on the price, who knows what possible and I can tell you, there will be two types, the one sold to the general public and the one sold to businesses and universities training hospitals and schools, I don't see any other devices offering this flexibility apart from your laptop, tablet and mobile phone all on a small screen.
Game on
Well, if you're talking about being on a journey and watching movies/projecting game screens then actually I'd like VR instead of AR. Why would I want my game overlaid on top of random surroundings (which looking at the Hololens might not work so well as the 'windows' seem to snap to flat surfaces which aren't in ready supply on the move).
Wouldn't it be better to effectively sit in a dark cinema with surround sound and watch your movie, or project your games video feed up onto the massive screen?
Plus the Holo lens FoV is pretty tiny which annoys me as all the promo bullshots have shown it effectively taking up the whole area wherever you look as opposed to the center.
While HoloLens is going to be very cool for gaming, I know that Microsoft is making it to use in numerous industries. Gaming, architecture, design, science, etc. etc. I like that they are trying to make something that can be used in all facets of your everyday life; it is an interesting little device, and I am excited to see where the project goes.
HoloLens is not a gaming device by nature. The everyday use will be awesome and the gaming aspect is just icing on the cake.
Imagine all the possibilities with it... This device is perfect for watching sports, gaming and of course porn. Every TV station tries to sell you the second screen stuff, here the second is just there when you want it.
on the video game front... yeah, hololens isn't that big deal for games, there are much better things...
on other fronts...
damn, this thing is amazing, i can see this becoming a must have product. it's still early, and there are lot's of problems, but there is lot's of potenttial on lens.
@ captain wormy...I think that remains to be seen. But yes, VR is more relevant right now and certainly closer to consumers hands. But hololens does seem like it has cool potential. Maybe it will wow us, who knows. Unless they repeat the whole "project natal will change earth and cure cancer and peter molynuex talking to wierd virtual kids" thing.
Back in the days, 3D was suppose to be the future. It did get resurrected only to die a horrific death. Sony went all in on 3D and it was an epic fail.
Back in the days, Nintendo try to do VR saying it was going to be the future. It failed and has shown up again. Sony has gone all in and guess what will happen? Just a matter of time.
Augmented Reality was done with Sony Eye back in the days. Like all the other tech, it was cool but died. Now years later MS is making it look even cooler but outside of Minecraft no real gaming advantage. It too will fail like Google glasses.
Cool tech but if the view from inside is really that confined I don't know how well it will do.
Haven't we all dreamed of experiencing holograms? Think the tech is still in early days so to most consumers/users on this site it might not look as appealing right now but in a few iterations or given some time, this tech could be revolutionary
I completely agree. Like you said in future iterations. I believe it's decades away similar to VR was in the early 90's.
Was with them until I found out it doesn't cover the whole display. Not fully immersing.
It costs $5000 is limited in its application and its uses. Of course no ones touching it.
What? There is no consumer pricing even in the pipeline. MS has said they want this to cost between 700-1000.
Fov is trash on this and like all Microsoft's mock up demonstrations it's just smoke and mirrors. Yes it works but it is nowhere true to the concepts and demos they show.
(...)the potential that lies within their HoloLens technology.
Key word: LIES.
Wearable autonomous form factor, ARM, and...think again, any of you believes in the pitch concept vídeos? how massive is the computational power required to display a real time generated, volumetric, dynamic hi res map of the surface of mars in front of you? Here's a clue, it would require a much heavier device or one that is not a phone gpu.
Verdict? Microsoft took an ARM and slapped a sticker on it that reads "holographic processor"(<-this is not a joke this really happened), the fact that they claim is an inventión of theirs, "the first ever", and try to infuse such nonsense is just the cherry on top.
On the other hand, it's not like it would be imposible to do some of the things displayed by the marketing team, if you really want to see other places, you know, you would need to use a GPU power of, jeez, I don't know, maybe a proper computer? Like with several GB of RAM and stuff, an OLED display that, -bare with me-, has a FOV superior to 90°, and maybe then those graphics could happe... What's that you say? The other guys are working on it?, better send a memo to MS then, they seem to be distancing from GAMES.
You actually read that crap...I stopped after the first 3 words.
If this was a Sony product he would be jiszing all over it.
I know that was a rethoric question, but all I'm saying is that the things they showed in their vídeos are imposible to do with a headset that is not connected to a more powerful render or server; a PC or console. You guys seem to think a computer ATX tower is big just so it looks more badass or something, but the truth of the matter is that there are power\size limits. You guys must think the oculus or psvr are "what makes the graphics", well get a f* clue, there's a cable and several GFLOPS on the other end. Hololens does not have that cable. It is capable of mobile graphics, ergo, the demo videos we've seen are bogus. These are simply facts. Cope.
first you have no ideal what your talking about, hololens is pretty much a wearable computer that's where its getting its processor power from. second, you say everything is a lie, People have actually try hololens and seem very impressed. So I don't if you been hater because it's a Microsoft product or you didn't do any research and make a lot bs. http://www.windowscentral.c...
As revolutionary as it with be , I doubt it will really get it's foot through the door marketwise . Between Oculus support on the PC side and PSVR with PS they'll standardize VR to be the new mainstream technology. Between PC and PS4's rapidly growing user base combined , the support they with get will be unfathomable . Application is key and vital to longevity .
Standardize is the main thought I had also. If your want VR to become main stream, someone is going to come out on top as the standard..who it is right now..i dunno
I doubt Oculus and psvr tech will be so far apart .... meaning hopefully that developers won't have a hard time coding to make a product compatible with both. If that's the case I'm riding on VR in general and not AR
I can definitely speak for the majority of 3D artists out there when I say that, Hololens will be a huge deal when combined with Maya.
I teach 3D and there has not been a single lecturer, industry freelancer or student that I have met who does not get giddy over the idea of seeing their models on their desk in 3D while modelling. This is indeed a game changer, and anyone who works on intricate modelling in Maya will know how beneficial it would be to have a 3D hologram of their model to easily view and understand depth, curvature and spatial density.
I will be getting one on the first day.
The difference is PSVR and Oculus (PC) are made specifically for gaming; HoloLens isn't. Even though it debuted at E3, Microsoft has said from the beginning that they see the Lens being used in all sorts of industries. Microsoft already has their VR set with the deal they made with Oculus; HoloLens is something different. Whether it will be good or bad, I have no idea, but I will gladly watch the project develop.
In the world of AR, I will agree with his statement. I have not seen anyone else pushing this type of tech they way they are at this point. I would purchase it, if it was affordable enough. Key word is affordable.
Indeed no one "touches" HoloLens, because every time they demo it, it is never showing any object occlusion ;-)
(ie. what would happen if you reach your hand out in front of where the hologram is being displayed)
Google 'Magic Leap'
They are definitely touching it. I would imagine they're seeing the complaints about the Hololens and it's minimal field of view and improving on it. I can't wait to see what they've come up with.
I can see this for revolutionizing the rts and simulation genre. It is outside of gaming where this device will really take off. For example in vehicles having this offering all of its display virtually along with able to talk and text while driving. Be able to fix pipes, be able to make virtual 3D models or fix a car. The possibilities for this device are endless
Hololens, Playstation VR, steam vr, oculus rift. It is all going to fail. VR has no future in mainstream gaming.
Hololens vs vr. Really? VR wins every day of the week. Hololens isnt even in the same ballpark. Looks like MS getting further and further behind lol. Hololens is a poor compromise tbh.
I believe this technology is good for other purposes but not for gaming. There is a reason why companies like Google, Facebook, Samsung, Sony and HTC are not going that way and instead are full throttle on VR. There is a reason MS is alone on AR while all the mayor companies are fully supporting VR.
@Tsunade
This device was never created for gaming it was created to do whatever a application ask of it multitask. So you are correct.
This device will do more than any VR device can do, for one you can move around with it, then add all the app you have on your device, go online, make call, do Netflix and more all this on the move, MS never created this for gaming. But this device will run all current games.
Game on
Augmented reality already exist. They are the first to put it on your head. it wont take other companies long to catch this train if it succeeds. But if I was Sony (Nintendo does their own thing) Id do like MS is doing with PLaystation VR. wait and see.
The only thing competiing with it is magic leap but its not as far in development as hololens.
Who wants a device on their head that shows what your TV does? At least VR is total immersion and all your eyes can see is the game with motion sensors..
Lmao all those downplaying it are not true gamers you would not like to projec a 70 inch screen in ur room usin AR? You would not like to lay in your bed and watch porn on thecieling and nobody but you knows what ur watchin? You would not like to game in ur room on the ceiling? You would not like to play a rts on ur living room table with hololense? Bunch of butt hurt people downplaying this it's freaking awesome a giant leap forward in tech yall just hurt cause a certain company is not doing it so of course it sucks. Be gamers and more objective people if this was priced @ 400 bucks you all saying it sucks would buy it lol
Yes, because AR is not that exciting right now... Especially hololens, when you read about it it seems to limited... I'll he happy to be proven wrong, but I think that so far the uses will be niche or demo like... Same as Kinect, MS sold it as "revolutionarry" and they're such good sales people that many many believed in them, while in reality they were buying something barely better than the PS eye or the eye toy already available :-(
In the future. It's not ready. The tech needs several years if not decades. The same happened with Virtual Reality until it's acceptable form of the present. I agree it's very exciting technology. It's years away to reaching its potential.
Just because no companies have showed something like it doesn't mean companies aren't prototyping something like it. In the furore I am sure there will be more AR devices and someday maybe a combo of AR/VR. Their device isn't even out in the wild yet it is to early to say.
Microsoft's Chief of Marketing probably turned a lot of fans against him with recent comments about how he thinks the company's original vision for an always online, no used game console was the "right vision".
Not even in 20 years. People like physical disk more.
Digital games aren't ours. We just own the license until they shut down the servers. No thanks
Just when I thought MS PR would turn a new leaf. They're back to saying we didn't understand. I'm sure everyone understood you clearly MS. MS should look at what their "original vision" did to their rapidly declining market share. Phil is doing a great job, but Yusuf is really not helping.
Yup, good example of this is look at how many games (arcade or full) you downloaded on your 360 or ps3, now look at how many of those you could redownload on your xbone or ps4? Besides the very very very few that were ported the answer is NONE.
Digital only is not the future .
Oh but wait...it isnt just MS pr. Sony and nintendo promote digital games as well. At some point there will have to be a transition from physical to digital. We all know this and no matter what anyone thinks....it is the future.
Maybe not tomorrow or 10 years (or 20) but it is happening. The push for any kind of adoption of a new trend starts with the right key ingredient.
Be that a new digital only version of a high profile game or the inclusion of content only made available to digital versions of a game...it will happen. Perhaps sooner than expected.
And when it does, then all these people who are saying it wont happen or people like physical will all be on that digital roller coaster with their hands up wondering why they didnt get on sooner.
if you think that its only MS saying this...you are sadly mistaken. There is an underline method to this madness and it isnt just MS that is behind it. Its any physical medium producer looking for a way out to save $$ but still deliver their product.
I think thats the point. Yes digital sales are becoming more prevalent, but Microsoft should take a page out of Sony's playbook. See, both companies want the same thing, but Sony is doing it correctly. PSNow is the first step and is more ambitious than anything to come out of Microsoft PR. Sony seems to understand though,that you can't pull the rug from up under people. If digital is really superior, we, the consumers, will eventually chose it for its speed and convenience. All the while we will still have physical copies.
Every successful technological step forward superseded its predecessors because it was better, not because the old tech was pulled from the market. Sony has introduced a service that is a threat to the preowned market, but they are smart enough to allow preowned sales to continue with the expectations that we will see streaming as a faster and more convenient method.
Microsoft learned the hard way that the old American philosophy is correct; the market itself decides. To say that their vision was correct is insane. Consumers are correct because we ARE the market. This is not open for negotiation.
Correct my if I'm wrong but I believe this is the very first comment in which XiSasukeUchiha actual says something sensible.
I disagree. I think in about 10 years most of the music, movies, and games will be digital only. Maybe they'll produce a limited amount of physical copies but I guess the lion's share will be bought digitally.
But still MS was way too early with most their policies and flat out stupid with some and I'm glad they changed them.
PC gamers tend to like Digital.
The problem with Microsoft/console is that Digital will never be the future with the way they are treating it. Watchdogs was £39.99 on Steam yet £60 on Xbox Live.
And this my good people is the reason I will NOT support microsoft this gen. They are just snakes waiting to strike.
*
On consoles, more people are buying games in physical form still.
Games are getting bigger. 20 to 40GBs in size. And with ISPs limiting bandwidth and throttling speeds, it's not as easy as it should be.
It may be the future, but we're not there yet.
*
@darth
OK. So lets say that in 10 to 20 years digital is where it's at. Does that mean that we have to accept it as the only thing today? 3D displays are probably going to be commonplace in 20 years, but is it something we should be saying is the future now, and is it something that an entire ecosystem should be focused around?
MS problem was never their DD policies, it was their policies on retail games.
Here's my prediction. In 20 years, both retail and physical will co-exist, and we'll still be having this same argument.
Seriously. In ten years internet providers will probably start upgrading their infrastructure. By then, games will probably be 4x bigger than they are now...conservatively speaking, and the net will still be too slow.
@Multiplatguy A hundred times this. If we go all digital, there should be atleast the subsidy of the cost of production of physical hardware passed on to the consumers, ala steam. You cant be seriously selling 4 year old games at 60$ and expect gamers to cough up.
Yusuf shouldn't be allowed to talk. Whether he is technically right or wrong, he just constantly says the wrong things from a PR persective.
He is like the anti-Phil Spencer. One has a silver tongue and says everything gamers want to hear, the other has a regular tongue that he uses to clean the foot he keeps in his mouth.
Yea I was against the whole digital thing. But the last few games ive purchased gave been digital. InfamousSs, Watchdogs(ps4), Wolfenstein (XB1). Its so dam annoying having to get up and change the disc of a game that i still have to install anyway. Id rather just download and be done with it. Way more convenient. And im not a "trader". I buy games and keep them. The discs are just annoying now.
So was I until I bought a few digital games. Don't get me wrong some of the DRM stuff was bad, but the always online was also to allow reselling/lending of digital titles.
So now as a result, if I want digital, I have to pay full RRP for a game that can never be lent out or sold. We all asking for these services now, and guess what, we can't have it as always online was the pirate protection. Great job internet, thanks /s
Copen if youre using your remote instead of getting up to change the channel then youre as lazy as me. Douche.
I have also gone all digital since X-1 and will not go back.Plus I like saying go to a game and start to play.
It bugs me having to find discs just to switch games. It bugs me having to find places to store discs (specially places that are out of the reach of my children). It bugs me when I cannot find a game I want to play.
I have no desire to sell or trade games. The box and disc hold no value to me what-so-ever.
Digital games are just a better choice for me, and for the poster you replied to. Being lazy has nothing to do with it.
You prefer discs. There are several reasons someone might prefer discs. That's fine. It doesn't make you better than him.
Then explain to me why people steal movies, games and music on the internet? How about explain to me why Netflix is so popular as a service? Let's take it a step further. Why is it that we like the PS+ service so much. We don't get to keep those unless we pay for the service.
EDIT *when I say the above. I am referring to the trend of DIGITAL, and how people use media*
Digital Age is here and the dip in physical discs sales are starting to show that. In a lot of ways we use digital all the time. Buy a CD, dump it on your computer or IPOD, never touch the CD again.
EDIT *I can guarantee that 90% of people then go to a store SELL that CD once it's digital on their computer IF they bought a physical copy. How would that be any different with Games? That's why there was a Digital Daily Check in. They had to protect the developers or they would be in trouble and owe. Just how business works. Step have to be in place for people making money on stuff. *
Just to be clear. I didn't like the Daily Check in idea. That was the one thing that needed work on. Otherwise the rest of it felt OK in my book. Obvious changes and restrictions needed to be made. You will start to see more digital sales happen in time. Both Sony and MS will make that happen, because they make more money off it. They will both show you the advantages by offering better prices and giving you more for your money. It's just a matter of time.
People steal movies because they are free. People use Netflix because it's $8 a month instead of $200. People like PS+ because you get a ton of games for just $50
@xHeavYx
I am not talking about that. Ownership is the word I base that off of when it comes to the PS+ and G4G service. Is all I am saying. It's ALL Digital still is it not?
Your 100% right. It is not right in 20 years its right now. Movie, game, music, book sales are all down by a large amount all because of digital. I have only bought 2 of 5 games on disc this gen, and truly don't plan on doing it again.
On top of that, as I've said several times, digital downloads protect developers and put the money in their hands, and not in the hands of Gamestop who benefit the industry not one bit.
@dlconspracy,
Let me answer this for you.
The reason why is the data size. Music takes up very little space and it usually comes in a portable device like an iPod or phone. In order for you to listen to music on the go with ease is to go digital. No one carries a CD player around any more.
Netflix, is cheap and can be access anywhere as long as you have Internet access. It takes up no space at all. People who have Netflix do not care for ownership.
Movies, most hardcore movie viewers who like quality will never buy digital. They will buy the bluray. But unfortunately the majority of viewers just want to watch the movie once it's released. Buying digital movies is a lot cheaper and it can be access anywhere as long as you have Internet. Not many people trade in physical disks.
Digital Games, take up lots of space and it seems that it will just get bigger as this new generation mature. Many people want to own their games so that they can replay it down the line. You have to admit, finding retro games to play is harder then finding older movies. Another factor is the trade in and sharing of the physical disc. You can not do this with digital.
Internet bandwidth and cap is another issue. Not all people have the bandwidth to download a 50gb game. It easier and faster to go buy the physical game.
The last point is portability, you do not want to lug your console to different location just to play a game do you? Physical discs allow you to take just the game with you to play on other consoles.
Because you DON'T own movies streamed through Netflix or the music you steal.
Major game titles are 20-40GBs in size.
ISPs like to limit bandwidth and throttle speeds in many cases.
And people don't often download 20-40GBs of music or movies at a time.
Physical copies look better in collections and they're not limited to an online account.
^^^
Ever heard of Steam? Digital is the future, and closer then you guys think. PC games have reached it. Consoles won't take long. Even Sony is launching a digital service, PS Now.
Now if people said that Microsoft's digital service (that was planed for the X1) wouldn't have prices and promotions that Steam has, that I would believe. Microsoft are quite stingy when it comes to discounts or promotions.
I agree. MS was looking at the Steam example for their own. I don't disagree with you. I am apart of steam.
Man you people hate change don't you. Either that or you are thinking narrow sighted as usual.
1) Digital eliminates constraints, we get full games without the limitation of disk space.
2) lower prices as there is no costs for shipping, disks, storage...
3) External hard drive is more reliable than disk, especially backed up in the cloud. A broken disk is useless.
4) You can download overnight if your Internet is that slow.
I think you people just prefer to kill the industry by reselling and renting games. You want AAA games, but don't support them. Also it seems like gamers are stuck in mud, we went from cartridges, to disks, and in the future digital. When is the last time you seen a portable cd player, digital I pods and phones took over.
people accept change, they just don't appreciate draconian policies being shoved down their throats.
the problem with their "vision" was that *if* I chose to purchase a physical copy of a game, they were going to revoke any right I had to be able to lend the game to a friend or sell the game in order to make my next game purchase a little less expensive.
and just so you know, music on vinyl is back (and has been back for some time now). people still want to have physical copies of things, so I don't think that forcing people into an all-digital distribution model is the way to go.
that being said, I buy digital all the time - I have been doing it for quite some time - whether it's a PSN/XBLA title or digital version of a full retail game. I enjoy the convenience of not having to travel to a store to purchase a game I want. Does that mean I'm going to stop buying physical copies? nope... because there are certain franchises that I will only buy the physical copy for.
Go home your drunk
It the arrogance that killed xbone (original)
They wanted a piece of something that is not up to them. You can go digital and nobody cares as it transitions into it either way, but what MS did is downright insulting to customers!
1.
Its funny how you care so much about disk space now. 50GB is enough, and if not 200 would be.
2. Are digital games cheaper? Really? Cos 90% of the time I see them more expensive than at JBHiFi. Of course I'm looking at the PSN prices, but please, tell me if XBL is different. Unless theyre selling new games cheaper on XBL than on PSN I doubt it, but digital prices are nearly always more, for some baffling reason. How would it be if that was the only place you could buy them?
3.
Really? I've had Harddrives fail before. Not very often. But I dont think I've ever had a disc fail that wasnt mistreated. Yes you can redownload a digital game. I supposed thats the price you pay to have it in your hand.
4.
So go make a sandwich huh?
Basically, i like owning the physical copy, I like having the cover on my shelf and I see no advantage at the moment to changing to digital. If they were cheaper than maybe I'll revisit.
I did appreciate the original xbox one vision. The problem was in the way it was explained. So I agree with Mendi. People never stopped to listen to the real story.(I understood it perfectly) And why was that? because it was poorly explained. You could trade your games like usual, you could lend/share your games to friends. But before they could explain it correctly the damage was done and they reversed said policy. At E3 this year, I was hoping they would have announced Digital downloads could be shared like originally they had announced, but alas, it did not make the show. I was also hoping for a price cut for digital only games too, cutting out the middleman would indeed make it cheaper and more realistic for people to adopt it. So a $60 game would be $45. I would definitely like to save money just like the next person. As for the people hate change comments I see below and above, yes, people do not like change, but if you make them want to change..with incentives like cheaper costs to purchase game, then they will adopt it quicker.
Edit: also the article and title were taken out of context...its definitely out for clicks/flaming.
1. Digital is limited by constraints. Constraints on hard drive space. Constraints on bandwidth. Constraints on what you can do with your purchases.
2. Not my overall experience. On consoles, on release day they're the same price. Down the road, retail games are much cheaper. More often than not, the retail versions are often $10-20 cheaper than the still full priced digital version after less than a month.
3. Take care of your stuff and you won't have broken discs. I haven't broken a single disc in my entire life. What about when the games are taken down from the servers. It's rare but it happens. What about when that server decides to shut down completely...such as Games for Windows?
External hard drive? By your argument, save money on games(already disproven) but spend it on storage mediums. Dunno about you, but what has more value? A game you can sell, or a hard drive that will be worthless in a couple years?
4. I can drive to the store and be back in 15 minutes max. Don't have to wait overnight.
The industry isn't dying from buying a reselling games. It's making more money now than it ever has.
Oh I see the usual suspects are here...... MS vision will come to fruition eventually, maybe under the guise of Apple, Google, Samsung or even Sony.....we are almost there already..... Video games are the only real medium that had a used market, and that will die eventually.... Caused by gamers who trade in for nothing, to see game sold for $5 less than new retail price...... Our own greed and stupidity is causing it..... Nothing can stop Drm right now, it is inevitable....... Gamers think the big guys listen..... They do listen..... To the till....... Thats what matters....... Bring on the hate....
"Caused by gamers who trade in for nothing, to see game sold for $5 less than new retail price...... Our own greed and stupidity is causing it....."
Greed is positively what this all boils down to. Though, in my opinion it's stemming from the opposite corner you steer attention towards.
I believe the industry will significantly contract or worse if they proceed in pushing digital exclusively.
I truly believe the industry will be feasting on humble pie if they take too stern a position on digital and always online/DRM.
Microsoft should foresee this. I hope they aren't blinded by the green light again/still
Here's the thing. Steam does that already and people love Steam yet that is indeed DRM.
People just choose what DRM they like which is weird if you are going to complain about it.
If you don't think digital is the future then you are very wrong. It may not be now and even in five years yet digital is indeed the future.
Also actually read the article before posting it was taken out of context.
20 years, huh? So what about those millions upon millions of PC gamers with huge Steam collections? Those are all digital. I don't see them complaining about buying games super cheap and not owning a physical disc. 20 years, sure, if you prefer to be stuck in the past while the world moves on..
Yes it was, whether you like it or not. All mu friends are buying games digitally. Everyone is connected. Maybe it was a bit too soon but it definitely was the right vision. It is the future. Just like how the original Xbox required Broadband when everyone was on dial-up, Xbox should have pioneered this vision. I hope the Xbox 4 will do what they tried to do with the X1.
This guy should shut up and let phill do the talking. This guy will set back all the bs phill has been fixing. Shut up dude and go sleep.
From what I can tell he just says that digital is the future, but where MS screwed up was trying to force it on retail. Said they didn't give the choice, which is why people were so against it.
Don't think this was really an epiphany...as it's what's most gamers have already said. Don't screw around with retail. They can do whatever they want to improve DD, but when they tried to apply it to retail, people were upset.
i'd say within 5 years it'll move to a primarily digital service across the board... publishers will love it as it'll cut out a cost on the retailers cut, physical disc/packaging/distribution costs and warranties (they do actually exist on games I've been informed)
if they cut the costs of digital by 10-15 it'll drive people towards it
Physical isn't going anywhere as long as there are still ISP mandated bandwidth caps and the US is still lagging behind in bandwidth speeds. And that likely isn't going to change anytime soon with these new threats to net neutrality hovering above our heads.
And an all-digital future definitely won't mean lower prices. Not by a long shot. The only reason we see discounts on digital versions of games now is because they use the discounts as a way to push digital sales. If digital is the only format, they'll have no need to try and the format to us and thus will just charge the same prices as they would physical copies. Even now, discounts on digital media is both rare and largely insignificant compared to the physical price.
Aaron Greenburn and Yusuf Mehdi, what do they have in common?
That they NEED TO SHUT THE HELL UP!
everything seems to be going MS' way right now with Phil Spencer as head. Dont let these guys tarnish the brand even more so...
Of course it was that's why you guys dumped it in a heart beat when PS4 was slaughtering you in pre-order sales.Clearly you don't stick with your visions Kinect is another prime example of all talk no walk from M$.
Firstly Mehdi needs to be very careful here
Secondly, "I think where we missed was that we didn't give customers the choice if they wanted to sell or pass on their disc." That isn't really where you messed up. The original policy was fine except you offered no give. Now some would have be loudly protesting no reselling of games but if you reduced the RRP price of the games to what they used to be I think that would have become a non issue. $30-40 instead of $60 would have made the policies work (especially since your competitor stayed at $60)
Argggghhh please Phil lock this guy up in a cage. He's just a terrible spin doctor nothing more. I mean what useful thing as he done?
Had they given people a choice this would have largely been a non-event.
All they had to say was that if you want to carry on as you always have then that's fine. But if you want to go along with their new digital plan then you have the choice, and they would have had to clearly lay out the benefits and restrictions that go along with it.
They failed to give people that choice and failed to properly explain the benefits, and that is why the plan failed.
I like convenience of digital. But long downloading and not getting a case with artwork sucks. Old xbox one was awesome you could get the physical copy and install instead of long download but not need to have the disc in your system to play it.
Not worth needing to be connected though and no other way they could do it :/
I think if PS Now takes off (and that's a big IF) then maybe the whole "digital" future will be accelerated but with internet speeds not being great for the lower class in the US I can't see this digital future really taking hold until 2030 or later. Even then, won't we need faster speeds when console games eventually jump to 4K or 8K resolution? I know 4KTV adoption is slow ATM but it should pick up at somepoint in the next 10 years (I hope) I'd just focus, if I was console makers, on upping the specs every gen and bringing bigger storage mediums to allow big resolution increases on discs.
This guy is stupid! i like digital, but i like my physical copies to.
What a idiot yusuf is. Including always online, really? he needs to go to i see.
I see the X1 is shaping up to look good, but the things he saying about it is dumb.
It's funny how people boycotted online only on the xbox one yet sony said the other day that over 95% of ps4 users are online lol
The tech is ready people like me with a 500 kbps download speed are not...
PS4 users are online IF THEY WANT TO! They are not forced to be online like Microsoft wanted before.
Anyway, as long are Yusuf one of the Xbox bosses, original policy are still in the air.
Whoa guys I was agreeing I said the tech was ready not the people :D
Hell I am in the highlands of scotland I NEVER wanted online only killzone took me 18 hours to download to give you an idea of my speed but strangely I dont get disconnected that often...
Everyone using online doesnt mean everyone is constantly online . I had net outtages today ... not being able to use any of those console would make me want to take it and smash it in front of their headquarters .
I can accept it for online only games , wich are still the minority , and usually got an actual reason to be perpetually online . But for solo play ? And hiding behind silly things like autologging solo play datas and social medias ? F*ck it
Having your console online is a bit different from it being required to be online for it to function, even if it's just a periodic check in kinda thing.
"over 95% of ps4 users are online "
I remember that being said. Though, that statistic should primarily be attributed to all the people that use various non gaming specific functions on their PS4/PS3. ie. Netflix etc.
By no means do 95% of PS4 (or PS3) owners pay for subscription to PlayStation Plus. Not even close. It was clever word play on statistics that were intended to impression the impressionable. Plain and simple
"We'll try again next gen, at least we know now if it doesn't work out we can always change our vision to how it suits us"
People are fine with PC being all digital but everybody loses their minds when the same concept applies to consoles? Makes sense.
I can play most game offline on pc , besides mmos and mp only games , how about that?
And once upon a time , when stuff like that were tried on pc solo games like Assassin Creed or diablo 3 , bricks were shat and much fuss were made . So no your point doesnt exactly works there
The difference is that you can go to Steam, Origin, GOG, GreenManGaming, Desura, etc. to buy games on the PC, whereas on a console you are locked into a single market. No competition whatsoever.
Also, most are fine with digital. There is no reason why Microsoft can't do all those game sharing features with digital games. In my case I hated the hybrid physical-digital deal that essentially gimped the physical and digital aspect of games.
Errr....people are buying consoles because they are consoles.... pcs are still there to buy if people want. Both have strengths and weaknesses but ms tried to take away some of the fundamental benefits of owning a console. Your point is weak.
Hm can you get a game for few dollars/pounds/euros 2-3 months after release on consoles? I don't think so. Besides PC games are cheaper than console. Example Witcher 3 Wild Hunt right now on steam is 40 pounds and on consoles is 50 pounds.
And what do you get in return.
Open marketplace with lots of discounts, offers from multiple stores what you get on pre-XB1 no competition.
Option to get some drm-free games and not having to been checked over 24 hours what you get on pre-XB1 near always online with your console becoming a brick if you haven't been checked within a certain amount of time.
Option for actual sharing and not limited to 1 hour. Abliet this was a feature that launched later on steam after the announcement.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum...
So no there isn't really a comparison to their plans.
i would be happy to go all digital if console games were priced the same as PC games, until then no thanks.
Yea, sure it was. It was so right it almost tanked your companies gaming business...
Digital is the future, unfortunately MS tried to ram it down consumers throats all at once without a clear definition on why digital is the future and the benefits of it.
All gamers saw was DRM, DRM, DRM and this is after coming off the Sim City fiasco from EA. MS shown have known that this is not want consumers are looking for in gaming consoles. Console gamers have been accustomed to a certain way of playing their console games for a very long time. You just can't turn all of that on it's ear all at once and expect gamers to go along with it. Especially when you have two competitor, one who is staying quiet and watching your every move and outcome.
This plus the fact that none of your higher execs were on the same page when they opened their mouth made it even a bigger bomb then it already was.
Digital is not the future, but the digital market is growing. Most people don't have the internet speed/data cap to download 20-50 GB + games. Plus many people feel more ownership when they have a physical copy of a game.
Anyone who thinks Digital isn't the future is in for an awakening. The transition is already happening. By next generation everyone will be digital only, whether they like it or not. It is just a better way to distribute code that is up to date.
I dont think the issue is that the future is digital . It just gotta happens when it's actually possible and convenient for the common user , not because some company is just being greedy .
It's possible now. Apple's App Store, Steam, Google's Play Store, Microsoft's Store are all digital only and very successful. It makes distributing content easier for everyone.
@Baka-akaB: Like I said, it is already happening on Phones, Tablets and Computers which are much larger markets. The question of "if" has already been answered, it works and developers and consumers love it.
No it's not . The "common" folk got a shitty internet and/or with usage limitation . Periodically being able to purchase stuff to download and grabs or stream , isnt the same and enough to push an eternally online system with checks in gaming .
Ever tried staying always connected in EA's autologs with say Fifa ? You'll drop in and out randomly in many places in the world . Wich is fine , until it tells you you gotta be logged to even play .
You accept that risk with an mmo or perpuetally mp game , you choose to do it . And you gain something from it ... not just access to a game you could just play offline .
It will happen , but first better servers and connection already need to be a common thing .
If you live where .....
Digital is already strong but an all digital future isn't what everybody wants. The only people who were in for an awakening are those who try to fly too close to the sun. Ms tried, they failed, hard. Will they try again..... that whole 'deal with it' attitude is what has helped ms fall so far behind sony.
Yeah but we'd rather be given full choices until full digital than have no choices at all and if you look at how rising online technology is even more risky with cyber crimes, I hope digital only doesn't come soon enough
I still buy my games and music physical
Mate, get out of cloud coockoo land people didn't want what you offered, they don't want kinect look at the sales numbers, the net isn't ready and won't be for years for your vision, if it was right, why'd you change it, because the customer knows best and it was wrong for now. Enjoy your fiber connection mate, while I'm 1 of 14 houses not getting it till at least 2017 with the rest of my road having it.
Didn't Sony reveal that 96% of it's PS4s are online?
And this is Sony.
That says a lot.
This current gen of consoles (PS4/Xbox One) is about connected experience. Anyone trying to say differently is just wrong. Both these console makers have plans and designs for keeping gamers connected to the internet 100% of the time.
96% of ps4s has been online at least one time..not online all of the time the ps4 is on, or on at least once a day to re-validate a damn license of games you OWN...big difference
We already download everything digitally except games on consoles (mainly). Steam is helping to change that. As is a renewed focus on PC gaming. I vote all digital with reduction in price and an increase in added features. I think in 5-7 years the next consoles will be digital focused with offloaded processing via servers and incredible fidelity and graphics. Online makes sense as long as they don't restrict you. Nobody complains about mobile games and they have a huge market. Give the option to the gamer but make digital more attractive.
I think a few people are assuming to much going off the title. He says that digital is the future, but he also says that it was a mistake that they didn't have a better dialogue with their fanbase and that the original plan didn't do well in the area of being able to pass and sell games. So...really all he is saying is that he believes in the future more games will be bought in digital format (than they used to be)...and so far he's right. He didn't say we are getting rid of physical discs anytime soon, who knows we'll see...but food for thought..BluRay is dying faster than people expected it to because many people are moving to things like netflix/hulu etc. We aren't at the point that physical discs are gone, but it's heading slowly in that direction...
Yeah, it's the future of profit for corporations, by eliminating the cost of disk production.
Just take a hard look at digital distribution networks like Origin and Uplay. Horrible service, crashed servers, and just another way of forcing DRM on consumers. No thanks.
I can go back and forth between 4 games in a matter of seconds with digital games on Xbox one. I'll never purchase another disk if I don't have to. I stopped collecting games years ago so I don't care if I don't have it 4 years from now. Don't kid yourselves, digital is the future.
I wanted to go all digital. I'm stuck with slow dsl. I am hoping they give us a pre install option soon. On the other hand there is nothing like opening a physical copy. I remember as a kid opening the nes box as carefully as possible. Reading the instruction booklet on the way home. I'll always remember the smell. As weird as it is. Please don't judge! I've been gaming since 85.
That's his opinion I'm sure he's not speaking for everyone at ms, but services like ps now are online based and other things but whatever I love my discs
He is right - digital is the future. They just got "we are gonna shove it up your butt if you don't pay us MONEY" part wrong.
Because go fuck yourself if you don't want to spend money on an external hdd, have slow internet, or like selling your games back.
I would love to buy all my games via a digital service , but when I can buy watch dogs for $64 from target and the same game is $99 from the ms store.
Until the priceing policy's change , I will be only buying my Indy titles using the digital service.
welp everybody reset your timers microsoft's pr done fucked up let's see how long it will take next time.
Maybe if they lowered the prices of digital games,maybe they would sell more...
Why would i pay 70€ for a game that as no case cost ,disc cost and manual cost??
If they lowered the games (digital )to like maybe 45/50€ people would get in more,then if i´m gonna pay the same price i´d rather have the physical version,and of course the collection editions that we all love,but thats a diferent matter...
Peace.
Look, a digital future is going to happen. No doubt about that, but I think where Microsoft went wrong here is when they tried to force it on us! They should've just let the digital revolution come along naturally, not force it down to the consumer's throats, no wonder they got as much flack as they did. Either that, or they seriously needed to explain their vision a whole lot better instead of just keeping quiet and letting everything fester like they did.
I think MS digital plan was great, they just did awful at explaining the BENEFITS of it. They were so vague at their release it left a bad taste. If MS came out of the gate listing all the benefits for their view it would have been received much different. The family friends sharing plan was awesome, they would have had lower prices if it was all digital, it basically would have made MS store like a baby Steam. MS failed to explain the positives and this is what we are left with, discs and full price DD games. Fanboys and people with the inability to show patience and MS failing to immediately list benefits caused this mess.
DD is happening, middle of this generation it will be pushed extremely hard. Sony is jumping on the bandwagon with PS NOW . The next best console will be a hub like device for DD only and it will be priced less than expected.
Physical discs are the alpha and the omega for me...
I can do with digital contents as long as physical discs remain...
I want to have choices, and as shown before, we folks gamers won't compomise on this.
No not yet!!!! Internet needs to improve before that! Better bandwidth and speeds than maybe!
I laugh when people don't think digital is the future...
First, the people sound like people did in the late 90's on music.
Second, PC gamers have almost gone completely digital through services like Steam. It is very rare for people to buy physical games on PC...
Third, over 50% of the games on the number one selling console worldwide (PS4) is digital only.
Fourth, physical game sales are declining while digital sales are increasing...
Some people like to think digital is not the future. But, the reality is that it is already happening. Just like it did with music, and it is doing with video, and it will with console gaming.
Gamespot: Microsoft previously promised that May would be a big month for Xbox news, and they certainly were not joking around. In case you missed it, Microsoft announced today that a new version of the Xbox One will launch June 9 for $399--the same price of Sony's industry-leading PlayStation 4. It was a surprise announcement, and it wasn't the only news Microsoft revealed today. We also learned that Games with Gold is coming to Xbox One in June and that entertainment apps like Netflix and HBO Go will no longer require an Xbox Live Gold subscription. In short, it was a big day for Microsoft.
We caught up with Microsoft chief marketing & strategy officer Yusuf Mehdi and chatted about all the major news Microsoft had to share today regarding the future of the Xbox platform. Before I could start asking questions, Mehdi told me that Microsoft decided to make these announcements today, ahead of E3 2014, so that Microsoft's showing there could be all about games. "We are really excited about bringing what we hope will be a display of games that will tee up an incredible second holiday for Xbox One," he said.
No more "tv, tv, tv, tv, tv, tv and tv"? After making the diskinect Xbox, will they drop the power of the cloud also?
Sorry but all those changer ware not made to sell what gamer want, they did because they need to sell more systems.
And how do they sell systems? By making improvements and making sure the consumers are happy. So yes, of course they did it to sell systems. That is in no way a bad thing for us.
I don't get why they say it will all be about games like its a new thing. Its E3 IT SHOULD BE about games!!
Lol for the last time it's not a price drop. Kinect 2 would probably be a standalone $99.99 atleast since Kinect 1 launched at $149.99. So therefore a system only sku at $399.99 is not a price drop.
Like mikeslemonade said, the standalone Kinect is going to cost more than $100, this new bundle is essentially a price increase, certainly not a price drop. And the reason Microsoft has to keep saying E3 is about games is because before last year they brought nothing but nonsense to E3, especially during the Kinect days. *shiver*
The $450 Titanfall Bundle was a better "value".
This is gonna hurt Kinect, if not kill it. If MS believes in Kinect so much, they probably should have bit the bullet and offered a legit price drop to $399 with Kinect. Sucks to be the guy who bought the system because they were told Kinect will be mandatory, but it also sucks to be the guy who bought the system wanting to see where development would go with Kinect. Not as many devs are going to be willing to invest in Kinect software if the install base dramatically drops.
Either way... just another example of early adopters paying the price of admission. I said this would happen by E3 2014 last year and got called just about every idiom of retard. But my username doesn't help :D
I never said it's a price drop. It's an option. An option a lot of people want. Yes, the people who got the Xbox One for the Kinect might get disappointed in case Microsoft decides to change their focus away from it. But hey, they paid for a Kinect and they got it.
Personally, if I ever decide to get an Xbox One I'll probably get the Kinect-less version because I still don't see any reason to have one. I'm not excusing the fact that the option should have been there to begin with but it's better late than never.
Can't wait til MS releases the beasts on Xbox One. Sunset Overdrive. Quantum Break. Halo 5.
Well obviously, that's how business works.
But if it means theyre selling more systems it means theyre pleasing gamers. So we both win..
Because they didn't adress the elephant in the room. Nobody cared about the games as long as they had those restrictions. And they had a fairly high price point.
If they came out and announced: No DRM, no always on/online, and a Kinect-less version back then they would've probably won E3 cause Sony already showed a lot at the reveal in february and therefore didn't have as much left for E3.
This time around it's all evened out. Both consoles are at the same price and the X1 restrictions are gone. So whoever brings the better games wins.
Such a fail of a comment
Last year they said the same thing and the whole conference was literally just games with no BS. This idea that the cloud is a gimmick and just talk is just flat out wrong. It is already being used by games like TF and Forza 5. The cloud maybe overstated by MS but the fact is over the years it will be bigger and bigger. It is not going anywhere.
Yusuf is really determined to push this "input 1" term. Unfortunately for him it is not catching on at all, not even his fellow execs are on board. Which is no surprise, because it sounds stupid.
This is NOT a price drop ...for 399 the console itself is even more expensive than in the Kinect bundle at 499. Also of course E3 is all about games, it's the biggest gaming event in the world... the bigger question is about which games. It would be quite ironic if they would announce a bunch of Kinect games now.
@zodtheripper,
I will have to respectfully disagree, MS is making another mistake in thinking that E3 is just "all about the games". It is clearly not, judging by last years E3. What I mean by that is that MS had the better games presentation last year, games were literally about 95 percent of their presentation. That wasn't the case for sony but still, people believe that Sony won E3, why you ask? Because of their policies and price point. IMO MS should have saved that info about the Kinect until the end of their E3 presentation.
No way MS shows a E3 filled with kinect games (they may show 2 or 3 if that). I am more inclined to believe that Sony will show a lot of indies as opposed to big AAA titles.
Yes please let MS show a bunch of apps and services so that they may be placed 3rd for this year's E3 event. In fact, I won't be surprised if MS show copious multiplatform games during their presentation.
I somewhat agree with the top part of your comment. But MS was all like Kinect and TV more than they were about the games. At least 60 to 40. Sony did win with price, policies, and games.
Your second comment is a little flawed IMO. MS will have to be more about games than TV and Kinect because they dropped unbundled the kinect which does TV well. So of course MS will be more about the games, they kinda set themselves up that way. Sony will not just show 2-3 AAA titles. Sony will show Driveclub, Uncharted, TLOU, The Order of 1886, and some hidden gems. So I already named 4 so your theory is debunked. MS will show Halo, Gears, Forza, D4, Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Fable, and a few more gems. They both will be awesome shows! The difference is Sony will have most of the games they show at this E3 available to buy this year whereas I don't think MS will have as many AAA titles this year, but more so next year.
"E3 will be all about games"
The amount of times I've heard this line from MS over the past few months has been unreal.
It's like they all go to a PR class and are forced to memorize the line over and over and over again.
@foxtrot
Please stop dude...If Sony was saying this line, you would be so hype.
Isn't that what you want to hear as a gamer, or do you want to hear sales numbers or how one consoles policies or apps are better than the other?
Give it a rest man!
Edit: "Sony was saying this then maybe I would because of their track record with games"
Exactly what I thought.
Sonys E3 wasn't just about the games last year. They "won" because of their policies and price point. They basically showed the same games from the reveal earlier that year.
They are saying it to get xbox fans excited and to let them know what to expect. Also they are essentially calling out Sony. Saying "ok now we are on an even playing field lets see who can provide the better games". Its exciting!
If Sony was saying this then maybe I would because of their track record with games.
However when you need to keep saying how E3, a GAMING event, is going to be about games then it seems silly to me.
So please, don't twist this and make it into something it isn't.
They've said the same thing for months and to me it seems like they are saying it so when E3 passes they can go "See guys told you are conference was about games" so they will get praise even though E3 is supposed to be about games anyway.
Sony showed multiplats and exclusive content for games, they actually showed very little at E3. Just their big announcement on DR and price, so far I have been highly disappointed in Sony's exclusive library this gen.
Last year MS also pretty much just showed games whilst the only new non-indie game Sony showed was the Order.
So MS actually have a good track record of showing GAMES in recent history.
@-Foxtrot
Did you even watch Microsoft's E3 conference last year? They kept saying the same thing after their Xbox One reveal..."And at E3, it's all about the games" and look what they did...They showed games for the full 1hr30min conference.
And now that Phil Spencer is in charge, how can you not expect E3 this year to again be all about the games?
@HyperBear
"And now that Phil Spencer is in charge, how can you not expect E3 this year to again be all about the games?"
When did I say this E3 from them wouldn't be about games, of course it will I've said this before because they need to fix the mess they created last year to lure us back in. Oh here we go super duper Phil Spencer to the rescue.
@ Foxtrot: You sound like a person who pays attention because Sony has the track record with proven games. These other people must have started gaming on Xbox. Anyone who thinks MS has better track records over Sony when it comes to games is delusional to the max! For you XB guys did MS support the OG XB? No, they abandon ship very quickly. Did MS have AAA for the last 2-3 years for the 360? Again, NO! Look at PS history, if you're too young look it up on google. Sony has always supported their consoles. MS...not so much!
Ignore the trotting fox.he obviously hates phil, ms and the xbox one.. it should be obvious by now .
No matter what MS says he and a few others always find reasons to complain.they never support anything Phil says. Always downplaying every positive xbox news. Just ignore them. they are a pessimistic bunch.
OT: its great to see their focus is going to be 100% games just like last year but this time im certain its going to be 100 times bigger. xbox fans will have so much to talk about after the show. its going to be great guys. really great.
@Mighty
Well that crap has to stop we are not stupid gamers that blindly follows
Not many people believe that Microsoft show will be about games , especially since last time they talked allot about media features etc.
Gamers aren't stupid so Microsoft need to repeat their message, in order to convince and show that they are serious and that their focus really will be on games. This however does mean they will need to deliver at e3 .
@-foxtrot Just like your comments
@xiSasukeUchiha "we" no, "you and the fanboys" yes
My comments lol
You mean like a lot of peoples comments on here, the ones who state the same things about Phil Spencer over and over about how he's a "gamer".
It works both ways pal.
Yeah...Phil Spencer is totally not a "gamer" at all, even though for most of his 19yr career at Microsoft, he's worked with Microsoft Studios on creating games for Xbox platforms. :/
And sorry for being excited about Phil taking over. I forgot that I wasn't supposed to be excited about anything related to Microsoft and Xbox. /s
Yes and how many times have I herd 'GREATNESS AWAITS". Phil gets he the point it's all about games the hell with the rest of the stuff. It will find it's place in the echo system.
Urm when did I say it wasn't going to be about anything. I just said I'm sick of hearing it as they seem to be trying to make a point when E3 is about games anyway....it's expected, thats what you should be showing in the first place.
@Fox Well have you seen MS E3 press conference 2010, 2011 and 2012?
They were horrendous MS thought their audience were a bunch of 9 year olds. I swore I saw some audience members leaving their conference they were so out of touch.
I'm not sure if you noticed but but there are certain journalists, outlets, as well as fans who still think MS isn't "truly" games focused.
Every time he says its about games I can't help but smile. Sorry but every time he says that it never gets old to me. You have to understand if you were a 360 gamer you felt abandoned.
Xbox in general has allot of catching up to do games wise(especially compared to Sony).
If Phil is as serious and as aggressive about games that he says he is then its 2005 through 2009 all over again if not possibly better.
Or maybe because they keep being asked the same question and YOU keep reading the SAME answer.
I love how as a gamer you are sick of hearing MS say E3 is all about the games...that makes about as much sense as a hooker in sunday school.
But then again you are the same guy who thinks Sony's Shu is down to Earth and Phil is just a corporate puppet. Your absolute bend over attitude towards Sony is hilarious compared to your desperate "not buying it" stance against MS and the their fans.
"They've said the same thing for months and to me it seems like they are saying it..."
And yet if MS said nothing I'm sure we would get some other form of cynicism from you. I bet if MS stayed quiet you would be worried that MS would have nothing to show at E3, or it would be all Kinect or they would show nothing but TV,TV,TV.
Cool, can't wait but for now I am back to playing Super Time Force! KOOKABUNGA!!!
It will have to be all about good quality exclusive games, thats all they have now.
Just imagine if all three major press conferences blew us away. I'm sincerely hoping it happens.
I agree I have been watching since 08 and there is always a crap conference and sometimes two.
I think this is the best chance since then though where that could happen. I am excited to see what all three bring to the table, plus I think Ubi and EA could have great shows too.
Phil Spencer is really making sweeping changes. How long has he been in charge again, a few weeks. Think about that.
Microsoft is now selling an xb1 without Kinect. Apps are no longer behind a paywall (x box live) look he's not afraid to change things that gamers don't like or what. Microsoft is changing.
The fact he's announced games for gold for June already. Maybe we are going to get two better titles for July? Announced at E3.
What else is Phil Spencer going to do to change the image of the x box brand?
I'm glad they changed some policies and reversed some others since the last E3. This will be Phil's E3 and not Don Mattricks.
All those policy distractions will be gone and they can focus on games, games, games. Last year, I thought MS's E3 was better than most if not for the DRM debacle.
MS: E3 will be all about games
N4G inhabitant: well duh E3 is a games event
Sony: E3 will be all about games
N4G inhabitant: OMG can't wait for uncharted 4 & project morpheus <3 *spills*
MS needs to do more than say "We're about providing you with excellent entertainment" while showing games. They need to show that they're about providing people with entertainment. To provide substance within the PR hype, because really all they very done is present PR hype at the sacrifice of substance.
Kinect screamed that when MS called it Natal and had reviewers as well as developers dress up in silver ponchos to advertise something which had no working games.
I'm loving the new Xbox management, I think they have learned from their mistakes, looking forward to E3 from the big three
I hope i'm not the only one who thinks Microsoft scammed the early adopters of the Xbox one.
They swore the Kinect was apart of the Xbox One. They swore it couldn't be reversed. Guess what.. it could be. The early adopters got scammed into buying a forced peripheral at the cost of performance for the console.
Microsoft was betting most of their chips on Kinect 2.0 and it backfired. Now they have $399 system that's weaker than it's competitor; along with the policy changes that mirror the competitor.
Xbox is having a difficult time trying to find it's "vision" in the gaming industry
I for one don't hate their system. I simply can't trust their company. .
Why on Earth are you being disagreed with on this? It's absolutely true. I'm a PS/Nintendo fan but I also want Xbox to succeed. I have tons of loyal Xbox fans that feel betrayed and embarrassed by Microsofts' inconsistencies when it comes to the Xbox One. DRM, Kinect, Live, system specs. Stop BSing and start being real, Microsoft!
It's going to be interesting to see how much their stance has changed going into this E3 compared to last.
Didn't MS say '2015 has the greatest lineup in Xbox history'?
Are we gonna ride with those words every year now?
And no, 2015 wasn't the greatest lineup in Xbox History.
So they're thinking about pushing the Live subscription model on Windows? Good luck with that
I would agree 2015 was the best year for xbox one. It had a lot more and better exclusive games than it did the previous years that should keep fans of various genres happy. My one gripe is that we had to wait until the end of the year to get them. Either way I thoroughly enjoyed ori and the blind forrest, gears of war remastered and rise of the tomb raider on my xbox this year.
VR?