Bluray is the creation of MIT (Mass. Institute of Technology) and nine technology companies. Sony is a part of this group but so is Samsung, Panasonic, Phillips, LG, etc.
In order to use Blu ray Microsoft would have to pay royalties to the Blu Ray Disc Association which currently has 19 members. I don't think the royalty issue is a big deal to Microsoft though. They pay royalties to a lot of companies every year to use their technology in Microsoft developed products like the Xbox.
The bigger issue to Microsoft is that they see Blu Ray as a format that won't have nearly "shelf life" in popularity as DVD did. Furthermore, Blu Ray is still not as popular as DVD because the idiotic movie studios are pricing their movies on Blu Ray at stupid prices, often well above the DVD version of the movie.
I think Microsoft's wrong in their bet that streaming is going to become the media of choice for most people in the United States any time soon. Comcast, Verizon and the ISPs are actively working to make sure that doesn't happen for decades or even longer. In Western Europe and Asia that bet will pay off though.
Then you can consider the next XBox not "next gen" already. I don't even need to wait for an announcement, the new console will definitely not have Bluray.
Microsoft has hitched its wagon to digital downloads and streaming media. All of the movie apps on the XBox 360 now should have convinced you of that, not to mention their pushing of Games on Demand.
Microsoft is also the company that may release a version of the current XBox 360 completely without an optical drive. Heck I've seen rumors based on alleged "leaks" from Microsoft that they were at least considering not putting an optical drive in the next console and using flash media for games. I have a feeling that developers and publisher backlash probably killed that idea quite quickly though.
Games bought on Steam can't legally be sold currently but that may change. There's already a company that allows people to use their site to sell "used" MP3 files. Predictably they're being sued by a music company, EMI.
There's also a company out there that announced a couple of years ago they were going to develop a way for consumers to legally sell "used" ebooks. That effort hasn't gone far (presumably because they're afraid of a lawsuit from publishers) but they do have a tool to let consumers sell "used" MP3s and digitally downloaded movies.
These companies are US based and intent on making selling of used digital products legal and above board, not simply be the US version of Pirate Bay.
This issue will end up at the Supreme Court, the question is how long it'll take to get there and what the Justices will decide. You'll have Hollywood, the music industry, Microsoft, Sony and game publishers/developers lining up to convince the Court why it should be illegal but I can also see retailers like Amazon, Gamestop and Best Buy wanting to make it legal so they can profit off of it.
The release of the Wii-U will be quite interesting. The Wii was something completely new and revolutionary so many people bought them out of curiosity. (Surveys later showed that most people who owned a Wii plus a 360 or a PS3 hardly used their Wii) I'm not sure the Wii-U, even with that tablet, will be able to generate that kind of curiosity factor.
The failure of the Wii in terms of "hardcore" games can IMO be partially be placed on Nintendo and partially placed on developers/publishers. The motion controls make developing some genres of games very difficult. The bean counters at developers and publishers don't like difficult because it means they've got to spend more money before the game ever sees the light of day and more units they're going to have to sell to be able to at least break even...and more money they'll have to eat if the project gets cancelled because there's no way to make the game not stink.
On the other hand, sometimes I think developers just aren't trying very hard and just want a port of the game to "just work" on the Wii. Games like that are destined to fail on the Wii and they'll fail on the Wii U too. Developers have to think up new ways to construct their games for the Wii that takes advantage of the different controllers. A game that wants to succeed on the Wii U will have to be designed from the ground up to take advantage of the tablet.
Neither of the consoles will block used games. That is just a dream of executives from Activision, EA and a couple other major developers and publishers.
Even if Sony and Microsoft both did blocked used games the fallout would still be enormous and the backlash wouldn't just come from consumers, it would come from retailers and some developers and publishers too.
Forgetting about the enormous consumer fallout for a minute, the retailer fallout would be horrible for both Sony and Microsoft. Companies need to keep retailers happy because those companies chose how they're going to design their retail displays and push consoles, accessories and games. It's not just Gamestop that would be hurt, it's Best Buy, Walmart and Amazon (don't forget, Amazon gets a small cut of every used item that's listed by a third party on their site). Should Microsoft and Sony even consider this idea I'm quite sure there are some unemployed executives out there who could explain to them why it's a bad idea to cross Amazon and Walmart.
Blocking used games would basically assure that what many haters of COD/Madden, etc. say is true actually comes true. Those games (plus GTA, Tiger Woods, and Halo) would be among the very few games that sell millions of copies at $60. Forget developers trying new things, it would be even more risky than it is now. Gamers won't be willing to spend money unless they know the game's really worth $60. At least one developer believes COD is the only FPS that makes money (he's wrong...Halo) blocking used games would mean any FPS with only a five hour campaign and "pretty good" multiplayer probably wouldn't sell enough to keep the developer in business.
You've just described the exact reason why people should trust Microsoft on the next console release. Everybody knows how poorly the original XBox 360 units were designed and built. You really think they're going to take that kind of a chance again?
If the next Microsoft console is as faulty as the first XBox 360's Microsoft might as well just shut down the XBox division immediately because the flight to the PS4 (unless they stupidly price it at $600 again) will be large enough to even cause problems to Microsoft as a whole. Only the extreme fanboys would be left. With each successive version of the XBox 360 they've shown they learned from the disaster they caused.
Lastly, the major factor in why Microsoft released a console they knew was horribly designed isn't present this time around. It really doesn't matter a whole lot if they're first to market. They've already got an extremely large user base that is locked in to XBL and Xbox games. Last time they had to convince people like me who believed Microsoft could never do gaming as well as or better than Sony. Launching first was a major factor in why a lot of people who's last console was the PS2 bought an XBox 360 over the PS3. They won't lose much (if any) of that huge user base if Sony releases the PS4 before the next XBox.
No they're not going to manufacture the next XBox in Austin. Although they could. If Seattle's got the world's largest collection of techie nerds and the companies they work for, Austin's second. Microsoft has a campus there, Bioware has an office there, Blizzard is there, Twisted Pixel is there and even Apple has a major campus in Austin. Those are just the companies I know off the top of my head that are connected to Austin.
The article said that the development units are being manufactured in Austin. Microsoft will probably manufacture less than 1,000 of these units initially. These units will get sent to developers so they can get a head start on designing their first game for the next console. I'm quite sure Microsoft would love to be able to say that Halo 5, GTA 6 and a Call of Duty game will all be published for the console the same year it's released. They'll probably do all they can to at least have a Halo game available on launch day. Developers can't meet that schedule if they don't get their hands on a dev kit well in advance of Microsoft actually revealing the next console.
It also makes absolute sense to NOT have dev kits manufactured by the same company that does the actual console. Media people watch the supply chains of those places like hawks. It's really no surprise that most of the leaks about Apple and Amazon Kindle products come from their well known suppliers and manufacturers. Actually Microsoft clearly didn't worry too much about this info getting out to the media or they would have used a company they'd never worked with before.
I disagree they're going to change the controller. People really didn't like the original XBox 360 controller at all (which was so disliked I believe it only ever released in Japan, not in the US or Europe) but since then everybody's liked the controller a lot, particularly now that they've designed a controller with a D-pad that's apparently actually usable for fighting games. Major Nelson's talked about this on his podcast.
I will agree with you that I can't find a logical reason they changed the hard drive connection from the original XBox 360 design to the Slim. Of course we all know the hard drives are too expensive but that's what happens when you've got a monopoly. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see Sony use a proprietary hard drive connection on the PS4 and disallow people from legally swapping out their hard drive.
The fact is that many FPS are simply bad games. I wanted to love Homefront, I purchased it on day one because I was extremely excited about the story. Unfortunately the game was four or five hours long and left me saying "That's it?" and feeling ripped off. Battlefield was a very good game and it sold well. Homefront wasn't and it bombed after a day or two. I also wanted to like the Operation Flashpoint games but they're so unforgiving I give up in frustration and most gamers probably don't even try them. Again, develop a better game and it'll sell more. Additionally, maybe developers who aren't putting out a AAA FPS should try to increase overall sales by pricing their game at $40 and release at a dead time in the calendar. If they did that they might be able to break even...if their game is good.
@Growgor When has Rockstar disappointed its customers with a bad game? Name one. I doubt you can. The DLC pass is actually a good deal for customers. Furthermore it's not required that you purchase the DLC pass or any of the DLC at all. You'll still get to play the maps included with the game along with what I'm sure will be an amazing single player mode.
WarGameJunkie's comments