Kotaku: Kinect Mendatory in next Xbox. Plus more.

  • 181 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#151 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -
Back to the topic of the next Xbox. http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=513338 Yusuf Mehdi, senior vice president of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment Business, just sat down alongside Nancy Tellem, Corporate Vice President at Microsoft LA Studios, to kick off this year's rendition of D:Dive Into Media here in Dana Point, Calif. The first session of the evening is being piloted by AllThingsD's Peter Kafka, and naturally, the topic of conversation is Xbox. For starters, Mehdi affirmed that Microsoft is witnessing an unmistakable transition of the Xbox 360 "from a gaming console to an entertainment console." At present, the install base is up to 76 million (up from around 70 million at the close of September 2012), with US-based users using the console for some 87 hours per month. In fact, he stated that 18 billion (yeah, with a "B") hours of entertainment have been consumed on Xbox, and while Netflix is obviously the driving force, it might not be that way for much longer. He was quick to claim that Sony's PlayStation 3 "isn't as good of an entertainment console" -- something he feels that "everybody knows" -- and insinuated that the next-generation Xbox will stick to "big and premium." In other words, don't expect Microsoft to kick out a $50 Roku-style content box. Mehdi wants to ensure that the future of Xbox enables voice control, interactivity, and "other stuff that's big and beautiful."
#152 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -
Wait so the console with a bluray drive, the one with a free Netflix, the one that came with built in web surfing... That one is not as good as an entertainment devices. Yeah shut up MS. And no I don't want to pay for your crappy extra entertainment.
#153 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

Wait so the console with a bluray drive, the one with a free Netflix, the one that came with built in web surfing... That one is not as good as an entertainment devices. Yeah shut up MS. And no I don't want to pay for your crappy extra entertainment.dvader654
lol MS. PS3's been THE multimedia center since it launched due to the Bluray player alone. MS has done well securing apps like ESPN and HBO Go. Both of which I am guessing they paid exclusitivity for.

SCEA has done well too with the MLB season ticket and like a million video rental apps, but SCEE has DVR apps, BBC apps and all kinds of crazy stuff. Sony really needs to bring every department to collaborate more.

#154 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

lol no. They cant. Building a PC is NOT easy. I majored in Computer Engineer with a focus on electrical engineering and a programming minor, and I can tell you nothing about it is easy. Even if you can assemble everything without blowing up the motherboard, getting windows installed with these custom parts can be a pain in the ass. I would know, i spent nearly two days trying to get everything to work. And then two weeks later the graphics card failed and had to be replaced. Wanna know how long it took me to connect my Xbox? Two minutes. Plug in HDMI, plug in Ethernet, Plug in power source and that's it.

S0lidSnake

Come on, you're just f*cking around now. Build a PC or buy one, the result is that anyone can get a gaming PC...

no im not. Buying a pc is a lot more expensive than building one yourself which is something you dont seem to understand. This explains why you think people wouldve chosen to biild a pc over getting an xbox.

Building a PC is cheaper than buying one? REALLY? Thank god I have you to teach me these cosmic truths I totally ignored. /sarcasm

You're right: no one owns a gaming PC. Services like Steam and Origin are run for the only 5 multimilionaire geeks in the world who own one of those unbelievably expensive gaming PCs. In fact, no one is gaming on PC right now, not one person in the world is playing Dead Space 3 or Battlefield 3 on PC as we speak, because it's too expensive to buy a gaming PC, no one could ever afford that! :lol:

I'm just messing with you man, but you sound like you're denying the PC gaming community exists: people have been gaming on PC and disregarding consoles for ages. Hell, I used to do that until a few years ago.

#155 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] Come on, you're just f*cking around now. Build a PC or buy one, the result is that anyone can get a gaming PC...Black_Knight_00

no im not. Buying a pc is a lot more expensive than building one yourself which is something you dont seem to understand. This explains why you think people wouldve chosen to biild a pc over getting an xbox.

Building a PC is cheaper than buying one? REALLY? Thank god I have you to teach me these cosmic truths I totally ignored. /sarcasm

You're right: no one owns a gaming PC. Services like Steam and Origin are run for the only 5 multimilionaire geeks in the world who own one of those unbelievably expensive gaming PCs. In fact, no one is gaming on PC right now, not one person in the world is playing Dead Space 3 or Battlefield 3 on PC as we speak, because it's too expensive to buy a gaming PC, no one could ever afford that! :lol:

I'm just messing with you man, but you sound like you're denying the PC gaming community exists: people have been gaming on PC and disregarding consoles for ages. Hell, I used to do that until a few years ago.

When did solid become me? But I bet more people are playing Dead Space 3 on consoles. :p
#156 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]So now you want to reduce the issue to games you personally think are system sellers? I responded to your initial comment about "most" XB360 exclusives being available on PC and proved, definitively, that was untrue. Whether or not you personally like a series is incidental because franchises like Halo and Gears sell millions of units and are the very definition of a system seller. And please don't waste my time with banal arguments about Gears or Halo sequels being rehashes when you can levy that exact same criticism at franchises like God of War and Uncharted. And Heavy Rain isn't a game, it's a wannabe film (with an atrociously poorly written narrative) replete with a smattering or perfunctory (and vapid) game play mechanics hiding under the thin veil of nice production values.Black_Knight_00

And you incur in the same fallacy again: instead of producing valid arguments to defend xbox exclusives you attack PS3 exclusives, as if two wrongs made one right. So what if Uncharted 3 is derivative compared to its own prequels? This doesn't chage the fact that you need a PS3 to play those prequels, whereas you don't need an xbox ro play Halo 1 and 2 and Gears 1 which, let's not not hide behind a finger: are pretty much identical to each other entry in the respective franchises, unless you can convincingly provide evidence of the contrary.

Also your critique of Heavy Rain is the very essence of subjectivity. Sure, the controls are clunky, but saying it's not even a game betrays how biased you are towards it.

I didn't attack anything.

I love those games but my point is that any criticisms you can levy at a MS franchise for being stale or redundant can be equally levied against a Sony franchise, especially those I specifically mentioned.

Your arguments are all over the place. Again, I've already, objectively and definitively, proved your initial assertion entirely false regarding most exclusives on the XB360 being available on the PC but rather than concede the issue you then retreated into your subjective prattle about the quality and redundancy of the games, which is an entirely different issue.

The irony is that I fully agree that the PS3 enjoys better exclusives but you are so stubborn in your quest to entirely discount the XB360 that you cannot let go of your hyperbolic assertions and illogical diatribes.

And my critique of Heavy Rain is entirely removed from this debate. David Cage is a wannabe filmmaker who foisted his crappy little story onto gamers by squeezing his ill-conceived narrative into a construct that was a vague facsimile of a videogame.

And yes, my hatred of that game is subjective. My analysis that it barely contains any real gameplay is objective.

Heavy Rain is about five notches above Dragon's Lair.

#157 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]So now you want to reduce the issue to games you personally think are system sellers? I responded to your initial comment about "most" XB360 exclusives being available on PC and proved, definitively, that was untrue. Whether or not you personally like a series is incidental because franchises like Halo and Gears sell millions of units and are the very definition of a system seller. And please don't waste my time with banal arguments about Gears or Halo sequels being rehashes when you can levy that exact same criticism at franchises like God of War and Uncharted. And Heavy Rain isn't a game, it's a wannabe film (with an atrociously poorly written narrative) replete with a smattering or perfunctory (and vapid) game play mechanics hiding under the thin veil of nice production values.Grammaton-Cleric

And you incur in the same fallacy again: instead of producing valid arguments to defend xbox exclusives you attack PS3 exclusives, as if two wrongs made one right. So what if Uncharted 3 is derivative compared to its own prequels? This doesn't chage the fact that you need a PS3 to play those prequels, whereas you don't need an xbox ro play Halo 1 and 2 and Gears 1 which, let's not not hide behind a finger: are pretty much identical to each other entry in the respective franchises, unless you can convincingly provide evidence of the contrary.

Also your critique of Heavy Rain is the very essence of subjectivity. Sure, the controls are clunky, but saying it's not even a game betrays how biased you are towards it.

I didn't attack anything.

I love those games but my point is that any criticisms you can levy at a MS franchise for being stale or redundant can be equally levied against a Sony franchise, especially those I specifically mentioned.

Your arguments are all over the place. Again, I've already, objectively and definitively, proved your initial assertion entirely false regarding most exclusives on the XB360 being available on the PC but rather than concede the issue you then retreated into your subjective prattle about the quality and redundancy of the games, which is an entirely different issue.

The irony is that I fully agree that the PS3 enjoys better exclusives but you are so stubborn in your quest to entirely discount the XB360 that you cannot let go of your hyperbolic assertions and illogical diatribes.

And my critique of Heavy Rain is entirely removed from this debate. David Cage is a wannabe filmmaker who foisted his crappy little story onto gamers by squeezing his ill-conceived narrative into a construct that was a vague facsimile of a videogame.

And yes, my hatred of that game is subjective. My analysis that it barely contains any real gameplay is objective.

Heavy Rain is about five notches above Dragon's Lair.

If I said "AAA exclusives", would that put your mind at ease? If I said: "Most AAA xbox 360 exclusives are also available on PC" would that sound any better to you? I thought the fact that I was excluding all the crap or mediocre games that Sony didn't want was implied, but I have no problem narrowing my statement for the sake of clarity. In other words, who cares about a zillion minor exlusives? Off the top of my head, the only games out of your long list that a PC owner could miss are Lost Odyssey, Fable 2 and Ace Combat 6. Feel free to add Forza and some rythm games if you wish, but they have equivalents on PS3.

Splinter Cell Conviction, Alan Wake, Fable 3, Metro 2033 and more are availanle on PC and as I said, unless one is a hardcore fan of Halo and Gears, survival is possible without playing the more recent entries in those series, if you've played the early ones. Now feel free to wave Bullet Witch and Bomberman Act Zero at me some more if you so wish, but I hope my point is clearer. No matter the number of exclusive crap on the system, let's talk AAA games and let's just agree the XBOX has not much going for it.

#158 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] Come on, you're just f*cking around now. Build a PC or buy one, the result is that anyone can get a gaming PC...Black_Knight_00

no im not. Buying a pc is a lot more expensive than building one yourself which is something you dont seem to understand. This explains why you think people wouldve chosen to biild a pc over getting an xbox.

Building a PC is cheaper than buying one? REALLY? Thank god I have you to teach me these cosmic truths I totally ignored. /sarcasm

You're right: no one owns a gaming PC. Services like Steam and Origin are run for the only 5 multimilionaire geeks in the world who own one of those unbelievably expensive gaming PCs. In fact, no one is gaming on PC right now, not one person in the world is playing Dead Space 3 or Battlefield 3 on PC as we speak, because it's too expensive to buy a gaming PC, no one could ever afford that! :lol:

I'm just messing with you man, but you sound like you're denying the PC gaming community exists: people have been gaming on PC and disregarding consoles for ages. Hell, I used to do that until a few years ago.

You are putting words in my mouth. i am not denying anything. I have been playing multiplatform titles on PC over the past year and a half. You are the one who is denying that buying console exclusitvity had an effect on the console race. hell, you are dismissing that it's even a thing. The entire thread you have been mocking console exclusitivity while MS has been laughing all the way to the bank.

And I dont appreciate sarcasm and getting my words twisted by someone who keeps moving the goalposts. First, it was 'anyone can build a decent gaming PC' then after i say it's not easy 'anyone can buy a decent gaming pc' then after i dare suggest that buying a PC would be more expensive and hence, not financially viable, the goal posts are moved even further by suggesting that just because the Dead Space sequel is on PC that means building a PC isn't expensive.

How many 2005 GPUs can run Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3, Crysis 3, Halo 4 at the fidelity they run at on 360? How many 2005 high end PCs can run Uncharted, God of War 3 and Killzone 3? THe $400 GPUs like the GTX 580 is what we are gonna see next gen. That's $400 for the graphics card alone. Factor in a 8 core processor, cooling system, cpu case, motherboard, ram, harddrive, power source and you are looking at a $1,000 PC. $1000 PC vs $400 PS4 or 720. And considering how poorly optimized current gen games are, this thing will be outdated in two years. We know that because the same thing happened last gen. Yet you continue to deny and mock everything as if it never happened and had no effect on the console race.

#159 Posted by UpInFlames (13279 posts) -

Finding sales figures for PC games is a f*cking pain in the ass and it's pissing off that UIF manages to find the one game on my list that sold well. F*ck! Ok UIF, I was mistaken but only on this one game. An exception I suppose seeing as how it's a PC series. Help me find sales figures for the rest of the games I brought up. Mass Effect, Gears, Splinter Cell because I sure as hell couldnt. 

S0lidSnake

If you were mistaken about this game, how can you still go on and claim that it's an exception? HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS WHEN YOU CAN'T BACK UP THIS CLAIM IN ANY WAY?

As for sales numbers for Gears of War, Mass Effect and Splinter Cell - they all came out on Xbox 360 first, so even if we had numbers they still wouldn't matter. The only time a direct comparison is valid is if it's a simultaneous release.

I have BioShock. DICE also went on record and said that Battlefield 3 sold best on PC. What examples do you have? And this time GIVE ME FACTS.

#160 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

 If I said "AAA exclusives", would that put your mind at ease? If I said: "Most AAA xbox 360 exclusives are also available on PC" would that sound any better to you? I thought the fact that I was excluding all the crap or mediocre games that Sony didn't want was implied, but I have no problem narrowing my statement for the sake of clarity. In other words, who cares about a zillion minor exlusives? Off the top of my head, the only games out of your long list that a PC owner could miss are Lost Odyssey, Fable 2 and Ace Combat 6. Feel free to add Forza and some rythm games if you wish, but they have equivalents on PS3.

Splinter Cell Conviction, Alan Wake, Fable 3, Metro 2033 and more are availanle on PC and as I said, unless one is a hardcore fan of Halo and Gears, survival is possible without playing the more recent entries in those series, if you've played the early ones. Now feel free to wave Bullet Witch and Bomberman Act Zero at me some more if you so wish, but I hope my point is clearer. No matter the number of exclusive crap on the system, let's talk AAA games and let's just agree the XBOX has not much going for it.

Black_Knight_00

Admittedly, MS came to rely on multiplatform releases in the later years of the XB360 lifecycle so again, I fully agree Sony enjoys the advantage in terms of exclusives.

That understood, the notion that the XB360 is devoid of any AAA quality exclusives is nonsense, regardless of your personal predilections.

Each Gears game has gotten successively better in terms of tech and play, the Halo games are all AAA in terms of critical and commercial success, and Forza is arguably the superior franchise to Grand Turismo.

Also, while in retrospect we can dismiss timed exclusives, some games, such as Alan Wake, enjoyed nearly two years of exclusivity, which is significant at the time of release.

I think exclusivity is one of the most glaring flaws MS must address this next generation but regardless, there were plenty of exclusive games on the system that justified ownership even if those games aren't our personal favorites. (I prefer the Sony exclusives for the most part)

And honestly, MS could have kept many of these games from the PC gamer had they wanted to but opted to extend these titles to a broader audience. Regardless, within the console construct, these games remain exclusives, even if not in the broadest sense of the term.

#161 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

Finding sales figures for PC games is a f*cking pain in the ass and it's pissing off that UIF manages to find the one game on my list that sold well. F*ck! Ok UIF, I was mistaken but only on this one game. An exception I suppose seeing as how it's a PC series. Help me find sales figures for the rest of the games I brought up. Mass Effect, Gears, Splinter Cell because I sure as hell couldnt. 

UpInFlames

If you were mistaken about this game, how can you still go on and claim that it's an exception? HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS WHEN YOU CAN'T BACK UP THIS CLAIM IN ANY WAY?

As for sales numbers for Gears of War, Mass Effect and Splinter Cell - they all came out on Xbox 360 first, so even if we had numbers they still wouldn't matter. The only time a direct comparison is valid is if it's a simultaneous release.

I have BioShock. DICE also went on record and said that Battlefield 3 sold best on PC. What examples do you have? And this time GIVE ME FACTS.

lol Calm down, relax with the caps. I clearly admitted that i dont have the numbers and asked you to help me find the numbers because I dont have any. I dont have any because publishers dont reveal numbers for PC games like they do for consoles. I dont have any numbers because Steam doesnt release any numbers when DD is the easiest way to count how many games have been sold. 

I love the way you argue. It's awesome. Let's take five games S0lid was talking about, pick one that has decent sales and use that to completely dismiss his entire argument. You know very well that I wont be able to produce the numbers because unlike console sales said numbers dont exist. You also very well know that the console industry is massive and that a large majority of these games sell better on consoles with some exceptions like Bishock, Battlefield and Skyrim... all franchises with PC roots. You reject common sense in favor of non-existant sales numbers because you know this will help you win an argument on the internet. Maybe it helps you sleep better at night. But it's BS and you know it. You dismiss my entire claim by posting sales of ONE game out of the thousands released this gen. Imagine if I posted sales of GTAIV or CoD or Halo or Mario and threw that at your face, you would laught it off. 

You want to make this about PC sales and Consoles? Fine. Let's do this. I am going to make a thread about which industry is bigger. This way I can focus on just this instead of a million other things I've been arguing in this thread with BlackKnight. Maybe we will get other users to give numbers. And then this way you will also be required to give  sales figures instead of just bugging us about it knowing full well that Gabe would never release these numbers. let's have this argument in another thread. I will put it up later today.   

#162 Posted by CastieI (124 posts) -
[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] What the hell does that mean? Fine, I'll assemble a gaming PC this afternoon, so you and S0lid can stop saying this "you don't have a gaming PC, so xbox has esclusives" bullsh*t

So wait, wait. Just wait. I'm trying to understand this. You've been arguing that games on one platform are somehow not worthwhile because they are available on another platform that you do not have? What is this... I don't even...
#163 Posted by Megavideogamer (5323 posts) -

This has to jack up the price of the Xbox 720. I have zero interest in kinect. I have Xbox 360 and have not bothered to buy a kinect sensor. There are no games that 1 want for kinect.

Xbox 720 having a mandatory kinect. Has killed the interest in getting an Xbox 720 at launch for me. I am content to wait for a while to see how Microsoft experiment with Kinnect 2.0 pans out. Kinect is all but useless for videogames beyong Dance Central and Zumba fitness. The kinect does not have a single great game. Traditional games of all Genres do not suit kinect.

Microsoft is right to focus on the Casual gaming crowd whom love kinect. There are only about 50 Million traditional Core or Hard Core gamers in the world. The casual gaming population is far larger that the true gamer population. A smart biz situation is to go after the larger group of people.

Playstation 4 I will get at launch. Xbox 720 I will wait and see how the kinect 2.0 experiment goes. I would rather have an Xbox 720 without kinect at all. Motion controlled gaming is not my cup of tea. Kinect V2 experiment means I will wait.

#164 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

Finding sales figures for PC games is a f*cking pain in the ass and it's pissing off that UIF manages to find the one game on my list that sold well. F*ck! Ok UIF, I was mistaken but only on this one game. An exception I suppose seeing as how it's a PC series. Help me find sales figures for the rest of the games I brought up. Mass Effect, Gears, Splinter Cell because I sure as hell couldnt. 

S0lidSnake

If you were mistaken about this game, how can you still go on and claim that it's an exception? HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS WHEN YOU CAN'T BACK UP THIS CLAIM IN ANY WAY?

As for sales numbers for Gears of War, Mass Effect and Splinter Cell - they all came out on Xbox 360 first, so even if we had numbers they still wouldn't matter. The only time a direct comparison is valid is if it's a simultaneous release.

I have BioShock. DICE also went on record and said that Battlefield 3 sold best on PC. What examples do you have? And this time GIVE ME FACTS.

lol Calm down, relax with the caps. I clearly admitted that i dont have the numbers and asked you to help me find the numbers because I dont have any. I dont have any because publishers dont reveal numbers for PC games like they do for consoles. I dont have any numbers because Steam doesnt release any numbers when DD is the easiest way to count how many games have been sold. 

I love the way you argue. It's awesome. Let's take five games S0lid was talking about, pick one that has decent sales and use that to completely dismiss his entire argument. You know very well that I wont be able to produce the numbers because unlike console sales said numbers dont exist. You also very well know that the console industry is massive and that a large majority of these games sell better on consoles with some exceptions like Bishock, Battlefield and Skyrim... all franchises with PC roots. You reject common sense in favor of non-existant sales numbers because you know this will help you win an argument on the internet. Maybe it helps you sleep better at night. But it's BS and you know it. You dismiss my entire claim by posting sales of ONE game out of the thousands released this gen. Imagine if I posted sales of GTAIV or CoD or Halo or Mario and threw that at your face, you would laught it off. 

You want to make this about PC sales and Consoles? Fine. Let's do this. I am going to make a thread about which industry is bigger. This way I can focus on just this instead of a million other things I've been arguing in this thread with BlackKnight. Maybe we will get other users to give numbers. And then this way you will also be required to give  sales figures instead of just bugging us about it knowing full well that Gabe would never release these numbers. let's have this argument in another thread. I will put it up later today.   

I can't post gifs, noo. Insert Every applause gif ever! My hero.
#165 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -
[QUOTE="CastieI"][QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] What the hell does that mean? Fine, I'll assemble a gaming PC this afternoon, so you and S0lid can stop saying this "you don't have a gaming PC, so xbox has esclusives" bullsh*t

So wait, wait. Just wait. I'm trying to understand this. You've been arguing that games on one platform are somehow not worthwhile because they are available on another platform that you do not have? What is this... I don't even...

No. Go back and read all my posts
#166 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

You are putting words in my mouth. i am not denying anything. I have been playing multiplatform titles on PC over the past year and a half. You are the one who is denying that buying console exclusitvity had an effect on the console race. hell, you are dismissing that it's even a thing. The entire thread you have been mocking console exclusitivity while MS has been laughing all the way to the bank. And I dont appreciate sarcasm and getting my words twisted by someone who keeps moving the goalposts. First, it was 'anyone can build a decent gaming PC' then after i say it's not easy 'anyone can buy a decent gaming pc' then after i dare suggest that buying a PC would be more expensive and hence, not financially viable, the goal posts are moved even further by suggesting that just because the Dead Space sequel is on PC that means building a PC isn't expensive. How many 2005 GPUs can run Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3, Crysis 3, Halo 4 at the fidelity they run at on 360? How many 2005 high end PCs can run Uncharted, God of War 3 and Killzone 3? THe $400 GPUs like the GTX 580 is what we are gonna see next gen. That's $400 for the graphics card alone. Factor in a 8 core processor, cooling system, cpu case, motherboard, ram, harddrive, power source and you are looking at a $1,000 PC. $1000 PC vs $400 PS4 or 720. And considering how poorly optimized current gen games are, this thing will be outdated in two years. We know that because the same thing happened last gen. Yet you continue to deny and mock everything as if it never happened and had no effect on the console race. S0lidSnake
I haven't been moving any goalposts, you've simply been twisting what I've been saying about PC gaming, based on your "buy VS build" thing and the fact you kept bringing it back on money when it wasn't about it to begin witth. My original point was simply that games that are on two systems are not exclusive to either, and whether said systems cost $100 or $10000 is completely irrelevant, since not everyonbe has the same financial situation and not everyone would choose to "fall back" on a cheaper console rather than a gaming PC. It was you who overcomplicated the simple concept that 2=/=1 or in other words, as I said many times before, a game on 2 systems is not on 1 system. It was simple as that.

#167 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -
And honestly, MS could have kept many of these games from the PC gamer had they wanted to but opted to extend these titles to a broader audience. Regardless, within the console construct, these games remain exclusives, even if not in the broadest sense of the term.Grammaton-Cleric
They could have, and if they did I would say they have some great AAA exclusives. But since they didn't, I say they do not have many of them
#168 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]And honestly, MS could have kept many of these games from the PC gamer had they wanted to but opted to extend these titles to a broader audience. Regardless, within the console construct, these games remain exclusives, even if not in the broadest sense of the term.Black_Knight_00
They could have, and if they did I would say they have some great AAA exclusives. But since they didn't, I say they do not have many of them

When assessing the entirety of the lifecycle, I would assert they enjoyed "many" exclusives.

In the last couple of years, I would conclude that those exclusives became much less frequent. Still, overall, the system had plenty of exclusives, many of them AA and AAA offerings.

 

#169 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]And honestly, MS could have kept many of these games from the PC gamer had they wanted to but opted to extend these titles to a broader audience. Regardless, within the console construct, these games remain exclusives, even if not in the broadest sense of the term.Grammaton-Cleric

They could have, and if they did I would say they have some great AAA exclusives. But since they didn't, I say they do not have many of them

When assessing the entirety of the lifecycle, I would assert they enjoyed "many" exclusives.

In the last couple of years, I would conclude that those exclusives became much less frequent. Still, overall, the system had plenty of exclusives, many of them AA and AAA offerings.

 

Plenty of them, ok. Many of them AAA I'm not so sure, then again we disagree on the definition of exclusive, so let's all agree to disagree a we often do.
#170 Posted by UpInFlames (13279 posts) -

lol Calm down, relax with the caps. I clearly admitted that i dont have the numbers and asked you to help me find the numbers because I dont have any. I dont have any because publishers dont reveal numbers for PC games like they do for consoles. I dont have any numbers because Steam doesnt release any numbers when DD is the easiest way to count how many games have been sold. 

I love the way you argue. It's awesome. Let's take five games S0lid was talking about, pick one that has decent sales and use that to completely dismiss his entire argument. You know very well that I wont be able to produce the numbers because unlike console sales said numbers dont exist. You also very well know that the console industry is massive and that a large majority of these games sell better on consoles with some exceptions like Bishock, Battlefield and Skyrim... all franchises with PC roots. You reject common sense in favor of non-existant sales numbers because you know this will help you win an argument on the internet. Maybe it helps you sleep better at night. But it's BS and you know it. You dismiss my entire claim by posting sales of ONE game out of the thousands released this gen. Imagine if I posted sales of GTAIV or CoD or Halo or Mario and threw that at your face, you would laught it off. 

You want to make this about PC sales and Consoles? Fine. Let's do this. I am going to make a thread about which industry is bigger. This way I can focus on just this instead of a million other things I've been arguing in this thread with BlackKnight. Maybe we will get other users to give numbers. And then this way you will also be required to give  sales figures instead of just bugging us about it knowing full well that Gabe would never release these numbers. let's have this argument in another thread. I will put it up later today.   

S0lidSnake

I am calm. I am using all caps because I am trying to get through to you and it still isn't working. You assume things with nothing to back it up and then present them as facts. One example is all I need to bring that down. I am not saying anything else.

#171 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] They could have, and if they did I would say they have some great AAA exclusives. But since they didn't, I say they do not have many of themBlack_Knight_00

When assessing the entirety of the lifecycle, I would assert they enjoyed "many" exclusives.

In the last couple of years, I would conclude that those exclusives became much less frequent. Still, overall, the system had plenty of exclusives, many of them AA and AAA offerings.

 

Plenty of them, ok. Many of them AAA I'm not so sure, then again we disagree on the definition of exclusive, so let's all agree to disagree a we often do.

I don't disagree with your definition of exclusive, rather I think there exists, as with so many things, gradients within that categorization.

PC gaming is an entirely different construct than console gaming thus I see the value of something being a console exclusive, even if said game can be played on the PC. For example I think the Witcher 2 was a pretty damn great console exclusive because it would require a pretty decent rig to run the game at the same fidelity as what was made available on the XB360 version.

Then you have a game like Ninja Gaiden 2, which saw a Sigma release later but was, in many ways, a very different game.

MS is heavily invested in the PC market and thus they often share resources with that demographic, which makes sense because in many ways the XB has always followed a streamlined, closed-box PC model. So while that certainly challenges the most stringent definition of exclusivity, I still think the notion of the console exclusive is a valid one.

And truly, your lack of a gaming PC rather nicely illustrates that point. (As does my own lack of ownership)

#172 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

When assessing the entirety of the lifecycle, I would assert they enjoyed "many" exclusives.

In the last couple of years, I would conclude that those exclusives became much less frequent. Still, overall, the system had plenty of exclusives, many of them AA and AAA offerings.

 

Grammaton-Cleric

Plenty of them, ok. Many of them AAA I'm not so sure, then again we disagree on the definition of exclusive, so let's all agree to disagree a we often do.

I don't disagree with your definition of exclusive, rather I think there exists, as with so many things, gradients within that categorization.

PC gaming is an entirely different construct than console gaming thus I see the value of something being a console exclusive, even if said game can be played on the PC. For example I think the Witcher 2 was a pretty damn great console exclusive because it would require a pretty decent rig to run the game at the same fidelity as what was made available on the XB360 version.

Then you have a game like Ninja Gaiden 2, which saw a Sigma release later but was, in many ways, a very different game.

MS is heavily invested in the PC market and thus they often share resources with that demographic, which makes sense because in many ways the XB has always followed a streamlined, closed-box PC model. So while that certainly challenges the most stringent definition of exclusivity, I still think the notion of the console exclusive is a valid one.

And truly, your lack of a gaming PC rather nicely illustrates that point. (As does my own lack of ownership)

I've owned a gaming PC up until 2 years ago. My current lack of one is simply due to logistics: I find that computer components tend to have a much shorter life when used for intensive gaming (some people will disagree but that's my experience of 10 years of PC gaming). Consoles on the other hand are carefully designed and balanced to sustain extreme gaming sessions without the need for upgrades or maintenance. That and I prefer console exclusives to what the PC market has on offer at the moment.

Should microsoft continue with their trend of sharing exclusives with the PC market, I will considering investing in a gaming rig once again rather than in the next xbox to play those games, while using a PS4 as main gaming platform. As I mentioned before, the reduced price of PC games more than compensates the steeper hardware costs in the long run.

#173 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -
Should microsoft continue with their trend of sharing exclusives with the PC market, I will considering investing in a gaming rig once again rather than in the next xbox to play those games, while using a PS4 as main gaming platform. As I mentioned before, the reduced price of PC games more than compensates the steeper hardware costs in the long run.Black_Knight_00
Until you do though those games are exclusive to you, console exclusives. Geeeeet it? That is what everyone is trying to tell you. <3
#174 Posted by Shame-usBlackley (18266 posts) -

Here's an interview that basically confirms that the next Xbox is not viewed as a game console, but an entertainment device. Yeah, no thanks. This is the first time in a long while that I have had no interest in buying a machine before the price was even announced. 

 

"Yusuf Mehdi, senior vice president of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment Business, just sat down alongside Nancy Tellem, Corporate Vice President at Microsoft LA Studios, to kick off this year's rendition of D:Dive Into Media here in Dana Point, Calif. The first session of the evening is being piloted by AllThingsD's Peter Kafka, and naturally, the topic of conversation is Xbox. For starters, Mehdi affirmed that Microsoft is witnessing an unmistakable transition of the Xbox 360 "from a gaming console to an entertainment console." At present, the install baseis up to 76 million (up from around 70 million at the close of September 2012), with US-based users using the console for some 87 hours per month.

In fact, he stated that 18 billion (yeah, with a "B") hours of entertainment have been consumed on Xbox, and while Netflix is obviously the driving force, it might not be that way for much longer. He was quick to claim that Sony's PlayStation 3 "isn't as good of an entertainment console" -- something he feels that "everybody knows" -- and insinuated that the next-generation Xbox will stick to "big and premium." In other words, don't expect Microsoft to kick out a $50 Roku-style content box. Mehdi wants to ensure that the future of Xbox enables voice control, interactivity, and "other stuff that's big and beautiful."

Kicking the conversation over to Tellem, she affirmed that Microsoft is going to invest in premium content -- and in fact, said that she "hopes" for some of it to actually hit end users this year. Not surprisingly, folks are going to be asked to pay for it, but she wasn't willing to talk specifics. Of course, existing Xbox Live users are technically already paying, so it's possible that this new wave of content will be bundled into that monthly cost. When asked if Microsoft was planning to fund its own shows (much like Amazon and Netflix are doing), she seemed open to the idea, but also noted that Microsoft will absolutely partner with existing studios and content creators in order to give them yet another outlet (read: not pay-TV) to get people hooked.

Finally, she noted that there's "more latitude" in what kinds of material they can produce given that console distribution isn't as regulated as traditional broadcast. And, while a good deal of it will aim to satisfy the 18-24 male demographic, we're told that womenfolk and families will be looked after, too. Oh, and as for these Microsoft-funded shows hitting other distribution outlets? According to Tellem, that's unlikely -- at least at first -- but a sizable enough check from the likes of Hulu, Amazon, Sony, etc. could very well change that. In response to a question from TechCrunch's Ryan Lawler, Tellem noted that Microsoft's desire to churn out original, interactive entertainment is a way to both "move consoles, create new relationships with consumers and to expand [Microsoft's] audience," and from a higher level, to create the next generation of TV and "have it be a hit."

#175 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18278 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]Should microsoft continue with their trend of sharing exclusives with the PC market, I will considering investing in a gaming rig once again rather than in the next xbox to play those games, while using a PS4 as main gaming platform. As I mentioned before, the reduced price of PC games more than compensates the steeper hardware costs in the long run.GodModeEnabled
Until you do though those games are exclusive to you, console exclusives. Geeeeet it? That is what everyone is trying to tell you. <3

Then everyone is wrong ;) It's not a gamer-by-gamer sort of thing: either a game is exclusve or it isn't. It's like saying that Street Fighter IV is PS3 exclusive because you don't own an XBOX. It's just not how it works.

#176 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

Here's an interview that basically confirms that the next Xbox is not viewed as a game console, but an entertainment device. Yeah, no thanks. This is the first time in a long while that I have had no interest in buying a machine before the price was even announced. 

 

Shame-usBlackley

To be fair, both MS and Sony made the same types of statements before the start of this current generation so I'm not too concerned with this type of blather. These execs always drone on about consoles being some manner of media hub but ultimately, as long as the thing plays games, I really don't care.

Now, if they lose sight of that prime directive...

#177 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Here's an interview that basically confirms that the next Xbox is not viewed as a game console, but an entertainment device. Yeah, no thanks. This is the first time in a long while that I have had no interest in buying a machine before the price was even announced. 

 

Grammaton-Cleric

To be fair, both MS and Sony made the same types of statements before the start of this current generation so I'm not too concerned with this type of blather. These execs always drone on about consoles being some manner of media hub but ultimately, as long as the thing plays games, I really don't care.

Now, if they lose sight of that prime directive...

I am curious to know what you think about the rumored specs. It's looks like both the 720 and PS4 are going to be 5-8 times more powerful than current gen consoles, but they are both going with somewhat underpowered specs. MS more so than Sony. Dont you think as the industry leader, MS should be going with a more future proof and powerful hardware? I am ok with them focusing on the multimedia aspect of this machine, but should it come at the expense of a better more advanced gaming enviornment? For example, the GPU rumored to be included in the Xbox is a mid range GPU from 2010. Where as the 360 GPU was leagues ahead of anything on the market at the time. Personally, I think MS is making the same mistake Sony made last gen. They needlessly shoved a Bluray player with every console along with a half a dozen other multimedia input formats, and jacked up the cost of the system by at least $250. The only difference b/w Sony and MS is that Sony's multimedia ambitions didn't neccessarily come at the expense of an inferior gaming hardware where as MS is supposedly going with a pretty cheap setup... affordable yes, but not so powerful.

Of course, I ask this under the assumption that Sony has a more powerful next gen console. It may not be the case come Feb 20th.  

#178 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

Here's an interview that basically confirms that the next Xbox is not viewed as a game console, but an entertainment device. Yeah, no thanks. This is the first time in a long while that I have had no interest in buying a machine before the price was even announced. 

Shame-usBlackley

Sony is going to focus more on multimedia features as well, I'm sure. 

Although Sony continues to put out numerous exclusives, something I don't see Microsoft doing. 

#179 Posted by Shame-usBlackley (18266 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Here's an interview that basically confirms that the next Xbox is not viewed as a game console, but an entertainment device. Yeah, no thanks. This is the first time in a long while that I have had no interest in buying a machine before the price was even announced. 

 

Grammaton-Cleric

To be fair, both MS and Sony made the same types of statements before the start of this current generation so I'm not too concerned with this type of blather. These execs always drone on about consoles being some manner of media hub but ultimately, as long as the thing plays games, I really don't care.

Now, if they lose sight of that prime directive...

True, but only one is making them now. I guess that's what bothers me more than anything. I could see them both being enamored with the idea prior to this generation, but frankly, this generation has been a cold war of sorts when it came to ideas -- both companies in a giant arms race of ideas that became more than a little destructive as time went on. That's really what concerns me -- the idea that a jack of all trades (master of none) console really doesn't need to exist, maybe CAN'T exist. Further, it hasn't just been this guy's comments, but the stated goal of the guy who helped spearhead the original Xbox project. 

My problem is that I still see no way that a device can sustain itself without consistent, continued support from the market that buys $60 games. And even then, they still need to attract as many of those people as they can and MORE. Getting someone who buys an Xbox and watches Netflix on it or buys one game and nothing in the future does nothing for them, and that has been their focus for three E3's now. Microsoft will surely be losing money on hardware when they release later this year, can we say with any surety that they are aware which market pays their bills and keeps the lights on? I can't anymore. I used to, but not anymore. 

#180 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

I am curious to know what you think about the rumored specs. It's looks like both the 720 and PS4 are going to be 5-8 times more powerful than current gen consoles, but they are both going with somewhat underpowered specs. MS more so than Sony. Dont you think as the industry leader, MS should be going with a more future proof and powerful hardware? I am ok with them focusing on the multimedia aspect of this machine, but should it come at the expense of a better more advanced gaming enviornment? For example, the GPU rumored to be included in the Xbox is a mid range GPU from 2010. Where as the 360 GPU was leagues ahead of anything on the market at the time. Personally, I think MS is making the same mistake Sony made last gen. They needlessly shoved a Bluray player with every console along with a half a dozen other multimedia input formats, and jacked up the cost of the system by at least $250. The only difference b/w Sony and MS is that Sony's multimedia ambitions didn't neccessarily come at the expense of an inferior gaming hardware where as MS is supposedly going with a pretty cheap setup... affordable yes, but not so powerful.

Of course, I ask this under the assumption that Sony has a more powerful next gen console. It may not be the case come Feb 20th.  

S0lidSnake

Well, 5-8 times the power of current gen seems pretty good to me. I certainly wouldn't consider that underpowered, especially when considering that consoles benefit from being closed box and allowing developers to better utilize those technological resources.

When I take a gander at something like ACIII, RDR, or Arkham City, I imagine games looking 5-8 times better as being a pretty significant leap over what we currently enjoy.

I do agree that MS is making a mistake if indeed they are sacrificing power for the sake of their multimedia aspirations but I have also heard rumors that these specs are a bit dated so I'll reserve judgment until we get the definitive lowdown.

But that is an interesting and potentially important question.

#181 Posted by D3s7rUc71oN (5180 posts) -

Sony & MS better put a great GPU in their systems because these will last until 2019 at least. Its better to take quite a loss at launch but seeing how they drag this generation too long ( MS specifically ) they will be more than be able to make a profit as long as they make any stupid mistakes. I wouldn't mind paying up to $500 if the system justifies the price for the premium sku.