330°

Microsoft: Future Kinect Games Will Support Controllers

Ripten wanted to find out if Microsoft's "no controller needed" device would ever work hand-in-hand with traditional controllers to provide a more "hybrid" gaming experience giving gamers the best of both worlds.

Find out exactly what Scott Henson, Microsoft's Director of Platform Strategy, had to say, and see why gamers may embrace Kinect after all.

gynecologistcobra5475d ago

Well, this opens up possibilities for developers, so that's good.

DJexs5475d ago

That is true but doesn't adding controllers defeat the purpose of controller free gameplay?

Blaze9295475d ago

not really. that's just how they are marketing it and to some degree, it will always be true for those games and will always be true when you are controlling the dashboard.

Some games will be hybrid games that use controllers. I thought everyone already knew this. I think Ghost Recon: Future Soldier is one game that will be doing this.

That's like MOVE for example. During GDC when that guy was playing Socom 4 he was doing everything BUT moving. Seriously, go watch it. But that doesn't defeat the purpose of MOVE though does it?

Don Mattrick says they already have games that are hybrid during the GTTV interview.

AridSpider5475d ago

Not really. You still have controller free games. No one said that had to be the ONLY way of playing the games though.

dustgavin5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

"You are the controller
Kinect brings games and entertainment to life in extraordinary new ways – no controller required. Easy to use and instantly fun, Kinect (formerly known as “Project Natal”) gets everyone off the couch. Want to join a friend in the fun? Simply jump in. And the best part is Kinect works with every Xbox 360®*"
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/k...

"That's like MOVE for example. During GDC when that guy was playing Socom 4 he was doing everything BUT moving. Seriously, go watch it. But that doesn't defeat the purpose of MOVE though does it?"

That comment was just plain ignorant.

SOAD5475d ago

Is that a negative bullet-point against Kinect?

That kind of nitpicking to me says that in one respect or another, people will always be looking for ways to call Kinect a failure.

dustgavin5475d ago

Nitpicking? Did you happen to check the site? Looks to me like Microsoft is the one touting that it is "controller free".

SOAD5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Kinect does allow for controller-free gaming, does it not?

This new peripheral will be used for the types of games that do require a controller.

There are certain things a person can do that won't require a controller, like navigating through the dashboard or interacting with NPCs through voice-commands, or playing on-rails shooters.

If Microsoft chooses to expand the types of genres that Kinect can work with, then they need to add a controller hybrid.

So, yeah, I reiterate, people are nitpicking about various stupid marketing slogans that MS is using just for the casual people, just so they can say Kinect is a failure.

EDIT:

@ dustgavin.

Really? You think that of all the people on this site, the only person who's talking about Kinect being a failure is me? Have you been living under a rock for a very long time? Scroll down further and read the comments from others who are using the very same MS marketing slogan to declare Kinect a failure.

ProA0075475d ago

how exactly is his comment ignorant? Isn't that what MOVE is marketed for too? To get you MOVING? That dude wasn't moving at all when playing SOCOM 4.

Hallmark Moment5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

No all it means is the device can provide games from both your body and a Wiimote or both.

Kinect will simply gives developers a choice while allowing Microsoft to share one new genre all alone while keeping a foot in the door Nintendo's market.

I had a feeling they were going to do this and I was surprised they didn't show it at E3 but I started thinking just what you said so they probably wanted to wait for the announcement later this year. Although the motion stick/Numchuck would be a option for gamer and developers it would be seen as having no faith in the fullbody motion push despite Microsoft mentioning this around 11 months ago.

Haters can't make up their minds what to hate on:

*Natal sucks because you need a controller for certain games*

*Natal sucks because it should be only full body motion*

Brain explodes...

dustgavin5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

The only person talking about kinect being a failure is you. I was just pointing out that they are advertising it as "controller free". In fact, once they do add this optional controller, it will basically be the same as Playstation Move. Controller+camera

@ProA007
When did Sony claim that Move was designed to get you MOVING? Please post a link.

IaMs125475d ago

Wow people are you really that desperate for it to fail? If so that is sad. Come on because they are saying games will be Hybrid doesnt mean it will fail dumbass... I called this point out wayyyy back then when Natal was first appearing and people are still claiming that it will either make it fail or not work. HOW?

They never did say controller free was the ONLY way and MS specifically stated they are NOT getting rid of the controller at all..

Rainstorm815475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

My problem with you Kinect supporters is that you will support it no matter what is said, instead of actually comparing what your getting.

Driving forza with no gas or break? no problem! Glitchy lag filled gameplay? oh yea thats cool! 150 price tag? what a deal! I mean really guys?

In MS press conf the guy made it a point to say "No looking for the controller in the dark" I guess you still have to look for that controller then play the game while standing huh?

Kinect had my interest before E3, but now they need to show me a reason to buy it, and im not buying another xbox so i can feel justified in not paying 150 if that is indeed the price.

As i said the Wii is turning the entire gaming industry casual, just look at kinect supporters, 360 is one of the most hardcore consoles around yet everyone on this site that wants one hasnt seen one game they wouldve even thought of playing before Natal/Kinect was announced.

What 360 owner wanted Kinectimals before E3?? I DIDNT!

Why o why5475d ago

some, definitely but others are here thinking like...Why did people slam disagree when we said MS will release a dedicated controller. Its a bit hypocritical. Its obvious you need some type of controller for certain types of games....its not quantum physics. The problem is many people believed too much of MS's hype. Kinect just isnt that practical for a wide range of game styles and its why you've only seen what you've seen ESPECIALLY for something thats being released this year. You have to think what the reasons were why Nintendo AND Sony passed on the tech

shoddy5475d ago

It never done before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
quite inovating.

captain-obvious5475d ago

well MS this Fucks up evrything you hyped this thing on ((Controller and you are the controller))

and now all the xbox fanboys well act like its a good thing

no its not a good thing
if a pay 150$ for NATAL and then i'll be back to me controller then Fuck that

Robearboy5475d ago

No it caters for those who like me, enjoys playing with the controller, it will give more options other than the buttons

UltraNova5475d ago

@ Captain-obvious

Exactly man you nailed it. They are touting it as a revolution where no controller is needed to make enough people buy it and then when they realise that games like shooters (90% of 360% in essence) cannot be played with Kinect.

But MS comes in a year or less later and says 'dont worry consumers we will give you the choice yet again! Just shell out another 50 bucks per person for our new controller that is required to play theses games. In case you wonder what happened to our selling point you fall for 1 year ago...tough luck assholes!'

What I see here is that MS is already backing up on Kinect . If it had the potential of what they've being bragging about for the last year they would never need a controller that makes Kinect the same as Move.

But try saying that to MS fanboys..

8thnightvolley5475d ago

i dont get y ppl are disagreeing with kinect being a hybrid, coz they just want it to fail, that is just pathetic. its a new tech and one at a very early stage without a fanboy crap of an eye it has alot of ways it can change gaming and also making hardcore gaming alot more hardcore especially in the hybrid sense of it. the control free gaming is the extreme in which to show it doesnt depend on controls and to open the mind of the devs.. but no one says it cant coop with a controller and that is music to my ears

Cueil5475d ago

How does adding features (as long as they are good) defeat anything?

Silver3605475d ago

That you can use Kinect with controllers. They never said you were going to be able to play shooters or other hardcore games with Kinect. They have always said it would be something to enhance the experience like head tracking or throwing a grenade.

UltraNova5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Please do as all a favor and post a valid link where MS emphasized in their marketing pitch (an old one not 2 days old)that kinect would support controllers.

And why at a later stage ? When it is so apparent that it actually needs the controller to even compete with the Wii and Move? (both of which support hardcore shooters, so dont try and spin this, Xbox exists solely on hardcore shooters ).

Maybe because they want to squeeze more money out of the unsuspected buyer that expects whats being promised right from the start?

Anw in all intensive purposes I personally will not support a company that does that, be it MS, Sony or Nintendo! As it stands both Move and Kinect are very expensive for my likes and I m sure for the majority of people who are even remotely interested in them.

There are additional costs on Move that we all know but MS is just plain unfair touting their motion control thing as a fully functional unit out of the box when in fact it is not even usable as it is on the most important selling factor to this present day of their system, shooters.

Spin it as much as u like but the truth is the truth.

lzim5475d ago

no the hybrid experience adds depth to controls.

+ Show (18) more repliesLast reply 5475d ago
bioshock12215475d ago

Why are you getting disagrees seriously I don't get the people in this website sometimes they are so weird. Anyway yes I agree this will definitely open up the possibilities especially for hardcore games on Kinect.

IaMs125475d ago

i dont understand either dude. Just like Hallmark said Its either Kinetic fails due to having to use a controller sometimes for certain games
and
Kinetic fails due to having to use your whole body

STFU people, N4G at its finest. Scary part is most they people are our future....stupidity

rdgneoz35475d ago

I somewhat see why the disagrees. Basically, it may open up possibilities for hardcore games with Kinect, but it technically is dumb.

Microsoft had me with Kinect possibilities before I watched the E3 presentations and saw 0 hardcore games. While casual games are fun, I myself prefer something besides whatever 2 girls pretending to be on a raft was...

With it being touted as not needing a controller to play games / you are the controller, telling people you'll need a controller for some games is dumb. It basically means its a ps2/ps3 eye camera for 150 (somewhat confirmed but not quite...) when you want to play hardcore games. The voice recognition is nice (for games, not dashboard / xmb /whatever interface stuff, which I still like), though games have used voice recognition through mics before (End War) and the ps3 camera does have a mic, so its not hard for either console to get games with voice commands as long as the developers actually care to / take the time to implement it correctly.

So overall, the whole thing Microsoft was promoting ( http://www.gamestop.com/gs/... isn't very true. Its now like a wii / ps3 eye cousin at a higher price for the hardcore gamers.

Side note: The whole using your body to play a game, I don't mind it or care, so it doesn't fail there at all. Only fails at living up to its slogan, "you are the controller".

maddhatter1235475d ago

he is getting disagrees because he is wrong. yes it opens up more possibilities for games, but only because it has the control so it isn't a kinect game it is a 360 game no different then what can be done now.

avengers19785475d ago

Did anyone check out gamestop.com to see the price of kinect games. There charging full price that's 60 bucks for kinect games. PS Move games are only 40 bucks. MS should look into that.

Rainstorm815475d ago

No one cares the games could be 100$ and they would buy it because MS said "Its the future of gaming"......No one on this site has tried Kinect or Move for that matter yet here we are a bunch of rats following the pied piper.

Come on guys what ever happen to a lil try before you buy. Until i get mmy hands on (or off depending on which one) Move or Kinect I'll personally reserve my thoughts on thier quality til then.

Grown Folks Talk5475d ago

their Atari or ColecoVision or NES or Sega Master System 1st either. They saw a product that interested them, determined if the price was OK for them, & made a purchase. Everybody doesn't wait & research everything down to the last detail. Some people want the next new thing no matter what. Just how it goes.

FreeFalling5475d ago

All the disagrees on the comments NOT deeming Kinect to fail shows that.

Kinect + Controller hybrid is a great idea, most importantly for "core" games.
As gamers don't we want to expand and boost the industry forward if it benefits us gamers? Not just rooting for a product to fail for brand affiliation.
If you are one of those people, then you have no business saying anything.

avengers19785475d ago

Believe it when you see it. Microsoft is saying that Kinect will be able to do all kinds of things in the future, but right now it can't do any of them...I'll bet you that MS is just saying whatever they can to make sure core 360 fans buy the Kinect.

DigitalAnalog5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Microsoft SHOULD'VE market it as both controller AND non-controller support but yet they MARKET it as a controller-free product. NOWHERE did it say that it would utilize in tandem with the controller as it defeat the marketing purpose. That's like saying: "Look we can have a phone that is wireless, oh oh and to give more value to this product here's an extension cord for free!"

Just imagine what would happen if a casual buyer purchases the Kinect then his/her son plays a different game that NEEDS a controller along with Kinect, what do you think they would say?

"But, I thought they said Kinect was controller-free"?

Dumb dumb dumb Microsoft

-End statement

FreeFalling5475d ago

The wireless phone + cord metaphor is irrelevant, since the control ADDS on the the experience. Microsoft marketed that way to make it more appealing to the casual audience obviously.

Also, Kinect isn't meant to replace controllers altogether, what person with an Xbox 360 will not have an 360 controller? It still comes packaged with the 360 since MOST of the games require it, no matter how long the 360 will remain.

When MS talked about the Kinect + controller hybrid, they were most likely talking about the games not built with Kinect from the ground up like the demos shown at E3. People will not end up being confused as how you say.

aaronisbla5475d ago

i don't think he means that people will be confused all around the world, but that if this is what they had in mind to begin with, what was the point of advertising it as "no controller needed" as its main selling point?

DigitalAnalog5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Read my comment again. I never said it "couldn't" add to the experience. Microsoft MARKETED it as "you are the controller" ; "controller-free" experience for Kinect, NEVER did they state that it would use the 360 controller with Kinect. So the whole point of Kinect is to be free from controllers yet they contradict themselves by using a controller - in which case - WHO AND WHAT is the controller?

You get my point?

-End statement

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5475d ago
Bereaver5475d ago

The problem with that, IMO, is holding a big controller with one hand, and then if needing to use the other hand, not being able to have free use of arm movement.

gynecologistcobra5475d ago

I'm thinking, use the controller and tilt yourself, or move your head. You know, like how parents would try to play racing games with their kids when we were younger. "No, you turn the thumbstick, you don't just turn the controller."

Sandwich Bender5475d ago

Oh my god, you might be onto something. If they would just make a platformer where you had to jerk the controller upwards to jump, it would be a hit.

Grown Folks Talk5475d ago

playing Super Mario Bros or Sonic on Sega Genesis. "Mom, moving the controller doesn't make you jump farther."

Electricear5475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

"Mom, moving the controller doesn't make you jump farther."
Maybe it does, sounds kind of kinky...

Edit: I know you meant further, but that was just to good a statement to pass up. =)

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5475d ago
FrankDaTank5475d ago

i think you are missing the point. the interview talks about them possibly introducing something like the wii nunchuck.

Bereaver5475d ago

Actually, I was wanting to see if anyone would reply to me with your comment. Because everyone was hating how ps3 came out with move and nav lol. Anyway, that would also break their bank as far as which console/motion control system is the cheapest.

So no, I really didn't miss the point, I was just hiding in wait. :D

FrankDaTank5475d ago

umm ok. i don't see how what any of the console companies is doing is bad. if the end result means we all get a great gaming experience we win. it's like what kevin butler said in the sony keynote. if you get a hot gf and i get a hot gf, you know who wins? everyone.

TheHardware5475d ago

you would need to buy a "Kinect" and then buy another controller... I pass..

FrankDaTank5475d ago

@ theharware

i agree that is why i'd just wait until they release a bundle with both. ms themselves admitted that this is still very early on so why should we pay full price for something they are still working on?

niceguywii605475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

Microsoft announced they would be bringing Kinect peripherals last year. I can't find the article for the life of me but they said they were going to release controllers suited for Wii type games.

Don't be surprised when we see games using the motion wand and fullbody motion tech all by themselves or games that use both techs. Star Wars would be off the hook.

ThanatosDMC5475d ago

Whoa... wait... wouldnt that mean that the Kinect would cost more if you have to buy all those accessories to buy future games? I thought it was suppose there wouldnt be a need for controllers and it's a step to the future. Didnt they say this during their shows/interviews/conferences?

Rainstorm815475d ago (Edited 5475d ago )

I honestly didnt know they were thinking of Wii type nunchuck devices for Kinect.....

So are we going to start calling it "Move 2" or "Kinect Moves too" or "Wii 3"?

Non stop hilarity on this site sometimes, it gives me a look at the community i call myself apart of (gamers). Alot of Xbox fans bashed the PS move for having the nunchuk like the Wii i guess its acceptible now seeing that Kinect may have it too.

HYPOCRISY = N4G

Heres some advice: Dont be a get with, come up with your own thoughts and dont have someone else come up with them for you.

This is a PSA from Rainstorm81

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5475d ago
CrzyFooL5475d ago

Wait,so if I'm going to use a controller WHY DO I NEED THE KINECT!!?!?!?

gynecologistcobra5475d ago

So you can move the controller up to jump instead of pressing A!

...

Yeah, I don't know.

beardpapa5475d ago

maybe they shoulda just put accelerometers into the controllers, release a new model and call it a day. Cheaper alternative.

Moving a controller up to jump is no more precise using a controller + camera combination than a controller with accelerometers.

webeblazing5475d ago

dont ds3 do dat. make ur player lean and jump, throw free throws and nade, and more guess it not a failure when ms shine its marketing light on it

AndersDK5475d ago

Man, its so funny to see how you guys are so worked up about the Kinect! Why can't you just take it as a possible new ways of playing your games.?? No one is forcing you to buy it!? And if you don't se a point in buying it, then don't! I have a open mind, and realy see that it will bring something new to the XBOX.. I don't give a da.. about MOVE, it won't come to the XBOX. MOVE is for the PS3, and that will also bring something new to the PS3. So what if all the 3 consoles now have a motion controller, be glad and injoy the fact that you will have the option of buying a motion controller to the console you like the best.!!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5475d ago
Show all comments (106)
210°

Activision Forces Adverts into Call of Duty Black Ops 6 and Warzone Loadouts

With the launch of Call of Duty Season 4, Activision quietly put adverts inside loadouts for Black Ops 6 and Warzone, sparking a backlash in the process.

17d ago
17d ago
lukasmain17d ago

Putting Ads in a pay-to-play Premium title? Well done Microsoft. Well done /s This is really scummy.

jjb198116d ago

This game will never change because these sweatlords love buying up all the skins and bundles that become obsolete the following year. They're the ones perpetuating Activision's greed.

VenomUK15d ago

If Microsoft introduces adverts into its other games I hope it can do them without disrupting the immersion of the game world. So for example in the new Fable game it would look out of place if there was a billboard advertising Cadillacs.

A far better way to do it would be to have a wizard conjure a 'dream cloud' in front of your character and then in the cloud you can see the Cadillac car and see the text with price and availability and hear a booming sales voice promoting the car. That would work so well as it wouldn't be a billboard and completely, 100%, fit in with your character's adventuring in Albion. Doesn't that sound so much better?!

crazyCoconuts15d ago

@venom, or how about our of 100 farts in Albion, 1 of them has a Cadillac pop out

VenomUK15d ago

@crazyCoconuts That’s undeniably off-beat - but it could really work!

16d ago
Show all comments (19)
410°

Xbox's first-party handheld has been sidelined

Xbox's handheld ambitions continue unabated, but the focus is shifting towards improving Windows 11 for third-party handhelds — for now. The Xbox Series X 'Melrose' successor is safe, with development continuing at full pace.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
19d ago
19d ago
19d ago
shadowT19d ago

Is there really a market for handhelds next to mobile?

Vits18d ago

If they run the same games as the main home console, then yeah, sure.
But if they need specially tailored games just for them? Probably not, unless there isn't a home console for comparison (see Switch).

RaidenBlack18d ago (Edited 18d ago )

I am kinda low-key happy this happened.
Dont want another Series S situation (games to be designed from 4 to 12TF scale and not 10 to 12TF).
Hope PS follows suit as well. Tablet SKU sharing with console for 10th gen, will just continue the cross gen -esque development/design phase/nature.
Want a proper 20+ only TF rasterized next-gen plz (+ frame-gen and the lot).
If anybody wants to continue the cross-gen, the Series S|X, PS5 will remain for that. And Switch 2, if you gotta go even lower in the TF range.

ABizzel118d ago

Yes and No. All of the PC handhelds combined have struggled to sell 7 million units, which would be a flop for any “console”. So the market is extremely niche because of price and target market (the informed hardcore gamer / casuals aren’t picking these up).

These handheld PCs are $500 or more, and offer at best Xbox Series S performance levels, so it’s best for MS specifically to just partner with ASUS, instead of investing millions if not billions.

Sony can make their own with custom AMD hardware due to their partnership, and stronger global brand for hardware. But even then it brings the question, of being a lower resolution PS5, and what does that mean for PS6 cross-gen (likely another generation where the first 3 - 4 years are just upgraded last-gen games).

Kosic18d ago

Imagine a Wii U style console, where the tablet doesn't rely on the console it's self, you download the game on the console under the TV and play in 4k glory, then you can remote play, get some unique game features if using both console and handheld in tandem. Then you can download the games in 720-1080p to play on the go, continue your progress, and continue on the TV when you get back.

Sony could get away with this due to exclusives, and that would be a reason for sales. Look at the portal.

I can picture seeing new hardware having some sort of GPU dock, where the handheld runs 1080p, and the dock has additional hardware to bring in 4k/60 specs.

I do think handheld gaming is going to be a strong future, imagine Nintendo release a new upgraded GPU dock for the Switch 3, every 2 years. More frames, sharper graphics on the same game for an extra £150 for a dock with a built in GPU chip. Console cycles doesn't have to be renewed, just the hardware can be improved by them reselling docks to us again and again with small/yearly upgrades like mobile phones.

GamerRN18d ago

Did you just imply that Sony can make a better stronger handheld than Microsoft? You do realize we are talking about Microsoft, the tech giant, right? If Microsoft can't make one that's cost effective, Sony definitely can't...

Brand and market share means nothing when you are a trillion dollar company

ABizzel117d ago

@GamerRN

It has nothing to do with what company can do it, or what company can spend.

For anyone taking a basic business class there is a term called ROI, and Xbox home consoles are selling at an all time low, meaning their ROI on a handheld is a risk that doesn’t make sense, even if they can afford it. Businesses are there to make money and it doesn’t make sene for MS to invest in a handheld that’s a companion device when their current home consoles they’ve spent 20 years working on are at an all time-low, when they can invest with little risk with what ASUS already has to offer.

This is why Sony can build a better device, because they have less risk involved, meaning they can invest more in their own product, and they already have an exclusive partnership with AMD on creating features and hardware. So in this specific case, YES Sony can built a better handheld, due to custom hardware, customer tools, low level APIs, compared to an off the shelf product running Windows or a Window Xbox kernel =.

TheEroica18d ago

I play steam deck primarily... Don't play consoles or mobile. The deck covers it all.

badz14918d ago

@shadowT

The Switch is a handheld, so will the Switch 2. what are you on about?

Cacabunga18d ago

To run native games offline? Anytime

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 17d ago
CrashMania19d ago

Funny to see the alt already damage controlling and having a meltdown with multiple accounts in the comments already.

Sad for MS if true, a dedicated handheld would go down a lot better than a rog ally 2 with an Xbox sticker on it I think.

crazyCoconuts18d ago

It couldn't have succeeded for a number of reasons. Now they've retreated to the Windows front and trying to keep that relevant for gaming. How long before Windows Central realizes there won't be a real console successor to Series X either?

Lightning7718d ago

Except there is. That project is reportedly full speed ahead.

Outside_ofthe_Box18d ago

@Lighting77

So was the handheld until today...

Lightning7718d ago

@outside obviously not since they sidelined it and they wanna see how the Asus does. Are you saying they're gonna cancel the next console?

crazyCoconuts18d ago

@lightning - I'm admittedly trying to box you in here - Do you think the next Xbox console will have Steam on it?

Outside_ofthe_Box18d ago (Edited 18d ago )

@Lightning

Here we go with having to spell everything out.

If I told you yesterday that Xbox was going to sideline the handheld console what would your response have been? Probably something along the lines of "I doubt that since Phil has been talking about it for some time now"

My point is just because they are "full speed" ahead now does not mean that will not change in future. As we have seen with the handheld. Do you understand what I'm trying to say now?

Lightning7718d ago (Edited 18d ago )

Box me in? No you said the same thing you've always been saying for years now. Those are the rumors to have Steam integration.

What about it

If you told me they were gonna cancel it tomorrow it would nothing more than fanboy talking points. I only wait for credible sources not what someone else says.

Also this is the handheld not a full blown new console. The Asus is yet to release and they're waiting to see how that thing does. Critical thinking is my strong suit you should try it some time if you can. But Ok cool well you hang your hat on that I guess. Main New console is gonna get cancelled even though the handheld is a different marketing device than the main the console itself.

__y2jb18d ago

I think there is a 75% chance there will not be another Xbox. There is zero reason to buy one now. No way it can possibly sell more than 10m units after Xbox went third party.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 18d ago
BLow18d ago

That's what they do. Goalposts shift like the wind.

I'm really confused on why they are making a "first party" device and also have a Rog Ally with their sticker on it. Make this make sense. How is their own device going to be any different?

Your console doesn't sell and they expect a handheld to?

RaidenBlack18d ago (Edited 18d ago )

The Rog Ally one is gen agnostic ... as you deciphered, it was to be the updated Rog Ally but just with Xbox branding. PC handheld with some Xbox features.
The handheld Xbox is/was supposed to be sharing the same gen/ecosystem with the next-gen (10th gen) Xbox. Think Series S but handheld ... it'll run the Xbox OS or whatever the next Xbox will run.
...
As for anybody wondering/confused why MS is doing another Xbox console ... coz mainly its the 10th gen of home consoles next, which started wayy back in 1972 for the 1st gen. And MS wanna be part in it, in the 10th anniversary gen of consoles. If they gotta bow out, they can't do that at 9th i.e just before 10th. They wanna stick around till the 10th or the X-th gen and check what the fuss happens.

Outside_ofthe_Box18d ago

Curious as to what excuses the spam was saying. Because prior to this news, the Xbox handheld was used as proof that Xbox is still committed to the hardware space. This handheld being scraped is not a good sign...

18d ago
Outside_ofthe_Box18d ago (Edited 18d ago )

@Spam
You can replace scrapped with pushed back if you like. It's not a good sign either way.

18d ago
1Victor18d ago

asq3= obscured: “ What’s your source on the handheld being scrapped? “
Read the article from Microsoft own website and one of your favorite quotations site when it’s something bad about Sony.
Oh BTW good luck with your next SPAM account.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 18d ago
Show all comments (77)
200°

FTC drops case against Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard deal

The FTC has officially dropped its case against Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
slate9126d ago

The sweet smell of tax dollars burning

Killa7825d ago

From the unemployment this deal caused, no doubt.

Obscure_Observer25d ago

"The sweet smell of tax dollars burning"

They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start. And yet, still, they´d decided to go ahead and double down on their bs to bleed the taxpayer even more.

dveio25d ago

The IRS demands 29bn USD in not paid taxes from Microsoft.

If we're talking bleeding.

1Victor25d ago (Edited 25d ago )

@slate: “ The sweet smell of tax dollars burning “

The smell of political donations endorsements under the table.
There I fixed it it for you
We all knew Microsoft plan of “10 years of all systems publishing “ and some of its supporters happy that after all the games would be “exclusive to Xbox “ now that things have changed and Microsoft got humbled by the lost of money from CoD going down from OVER A BILLI🤑N to
MILLI😩NS the sales failing of games that would released on PlayStation and be forced by INVESTORS asking for their M🤑NEY to grow faster than the next 10 years it is obvious that it would be a waste of money to continue this litigation.
Edit:@obscured: “ They never stood a chance. It was a lost cause from the start “

Same as your grievance stages.
Have you passed the bargaining stage yet ? Or are you still on the anger stage 🤣

slate9125d ago

I knew my singe bipartisan sentence would bring out the crazies. Thanks for the wall

Astrokis25d ago

Not sure if I’m disturbed or entertained but either way I hope you are alright

OtterX25d ago

I think they're convinced now that MS won't (and can't) withhold releases from conpeting platforms. MS on the street corner now like, "Who wants a taste?!"

PhillyDonJawn25d ago

I wont be too sure of that. Gotta wait and see till after these deals expire

OtterX25d ago

That's how it always starts, "I'll just work this street corner for a short while until I get caught up on my bills..."

Tacoboto25d ago

Oh yeah, they're totally gonna make Xbox exclusives again, with the hardware they're totally committed to selling and making available lol

raWfodog25d ago

As far as I'm aware, the only 'deal' that was discussed was for Call of Duty. Xbox had no obligation to make any of their other games multiplatform. They did that of their own accord.

OtterX25d ago (Edited 25d ago )

**btw, I'm talking about street food vendors, just in case there's any confusion!

https://external-content.du...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 25d ago
Lightning7725d ago (Edited 25d ago )

I've seen videos and talk a online speculating MS long game. Some think that MS multiplat move is use to appease the FTC so they can buy more and is somehow a move that could get Sony to open up their platform. In other words them going third party and letting their games go everywhere. MS possible scheme and ulterior motives, speculated by Jeff Grubb is that putting Xbox store on PS via regulation Which would hurt PS buissness very badly because that 30% cut would be even less or not a cut at all. MS buys more because they're "playing nice" by opening up its platform to Epic store and steam which would force Apple and Sony to open up their ecosystem to other stores like MS.

If that's the case that'll mean as I said before, PS fans buying Cod on PS via MS store would give 100% maybe even 90% of the money being pocketed by MS while Sony's store front wanes when it comes to third party because guess what? MS is buying more third party and preying off the extreme ignorance of the FTC. Manipulation of the FTC and MS overtaking the PS store and customers

My thing is this. I know it's a opinion and speculation but why does Sony have to open up its store or force them to go multiplat? If they still believe in selling their freakin console then let them do it. If they want to provide the best games and the best content for its fans then let them do it!? Why because the competition is trash at selling games and consoles for 14 years now Sony has to change? MS using the ignorance of the FTC to overtake gaming as we know it?

Again it's just talk and opinion but man this seems very, very possible imo.

dveio25d ago

Well, at the time, I actually did think the FTC and CMA did a poor job in court. But also the judge.

Having said that - it is what it is.

If 75bn mergers in any industry ain't a threshold to deny them, then I don't know what is.

As far as your thoughts about other 3rd parties getting taken over in the future go:

I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher.

But smaller studios ... maybe.

However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft.

That isn't to say an announcement of such couldn't drop on Monday already. Because we today know that Microsoft had approached a plethora of other studios in 2018 to 2021, such as IOI, CD Project, etc.

We'll see. And we can't do anything about it. It's up to trade commissions and then probably courts to decide.

Lightning7725d ago (Edited 25d ago )

"I think publisher buyouts are off the list now. I think it would be reeeeally difficult for MS to win another trial try taking over any other publisher."

That's the thing MS is ticking all the boxes by not have anything be exclusive so the CMA/FTC see that they're doing "fair practice" in games and content distribution. Which technically greenlits more aquisions or it makes it easier for acquisitions because MS is a mega publisher now.

"However, right now I can't see studios out there advocating for a buyout from Microsoft."

Hopefully not but them going multiplat could entice Studios to join MS because nothing is not longer exclusive which means more money for them, studio and teams.

We can't do nothing about it but Sony can. They can block xbox games on their console (lose that 30% cut) but Sony won't do that because that's money that will be lost and Sony runs a buissness. That's the only way to hurt or slow down Xbox.

I'm probably over thinking it as I do these things but it's something we shouldn't just ignore and be weary of MS motives here. I'm keeping an eye on them.

Rancegamerx25d ago

The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up. Microsoft’s multiplatform approach is 100% due to past failures and its laughable position in the gaming industry. Their best attempt was a fluke and a lie, brought on by Sony’s missteps and a poorly made machine that broke down too often.

Sony would never allow themselves to be "forced" to do anything; they control their platform and storefront perfectly fine without the need or desire to add an unnecessary Microsoft storefront. Even if, by some flaw on Sony’s part, Microsoft were able to introduce its store on PlayStation, Sony would adapt rather than collapse. Digital storefront competition already exists (Steam, Epic Games Store, Xbox Store), and PlayStation’s business won’t suddenly "wane."

Also, regulators like the FTC don’t operate on ignorance—they actively assess market behavior to prevent monopolies. Microsoft isn’t secretly overtaking gaming with some ultimate scheme. The industry might be changing or shifting (for the worse, in my opinion), but Sony will continue evolving based on market trends, not because of alleged schemes.

Gaming isn’t about one company "playing nice" or another being "forced" to change—it’s about making money with games, something Microsoft has yet to achieve in 25+ years.

Lightning7725d ago

"The idea that Microsoft is manipulating the FTC and forcing Sony to open its platform is silly and has no evidence to back it up."

That's why I said it was all speculation that's what Jeff Grubb opinion. I made that clear several times. You know what's funny? When Jim was in court ppl got mad at the FTC for protecting Jim Ryan instead of the consumer. Maybe he was right to worry about his business. Now look Releasing Xbox games on PS keeps MS studio an a float. Now Xbox games are all over PS now. Maybe Jim was onto something.

MS is still competing with Sony just in a very different way. The FTC back down mainly means they can buy more and MS next steps can proceed. We'll have to see what happens in the future but I wouldn't be so sure on your stance.

InUrFoxHole25d ago

@Lightning77
MS putting games everywhere is the most consumer friendly thing I've seen a game company do.

dveio25d ago

@InUrFox

What does "putting everywhere" actually mean?

This book has so many pages.

• Xbox was dying in revenue
• Regulators put a 10 year deal on CoD
• Microsoft had to give away the streaming
• Spencer himself only offered 3 yrs initially

And most importantly

• Again, Xbox was dying in revenue

Xbox have the benefit of their actual financial situation giving regulators and courts the impression they release games everywhere, what they actually do.

But for reasons they can't be proven guilty of anything in court.

I'm not judging, it's just what it is.

IF the Series generation would have developed differently and was much more successful, I don't hesitate any second to believe in what Spencer had originally planned to do:

• Make everything Xbox exclusive
• We today know that Spencer had also approached Sega, From Software, CD Project, Nintendo, and even Valve was on their list of buyouts.

MS are playing a card here everyone knows why they are doing it.

Putting Doom "everywhere", which even was it already before it got bought, ain't a MS thing.

It would had hurt them in many ways if they'd put it exclusively to Xbox.

But, no matter what - it is what it is.

Xbox bought themselves back into the game. And I think many people just don't have very fond feelings towards this behaviour, wether on corporate nor private levels.

Let's see how they'll run with it.

In 2030, but most importantly after regulations will have expired we will learn better.

Reaper22_25d ago (Edited 25d ago )

Seemed like a lost cause anyway. Microsoft gambled and it paid off big time. That's what you call a big boss move. Sony played a huge part in the success of that acquisition.

wesnytsfs25d ago

Bout time. Pointless from the start.

Show all comments (26)