@TiberiusJonez If saying I was "whining" was supposed to be a joke, my apologies...saying someone's whining tends to be a bit abrasive on the net, don'tcha know...
Some people live in very small places, it's the truth. I read somewhere once that the majority of Xbox players are (or were) college students. If that's the case, and many of them live in tiny dorms, they need to figure out their space however they can. It behooves Microsoft to accommodate such obvious precedents, and not insist on going backwards.
I did kind of backpedal a tad and acknowledge it may not be a game-changer...but I stand by claim...I know on launch day, some idiots are going to situate their XBox Ones wrong, and get mad at Microsoft. And they need to avoid any more undue negativity.
@TiberiusJonez Dude, I'm about the last person you have to explain the wonders of one button joysticks and Pong to. I may be only 33, but I've loved both pretty equally as the beginning of my gaming addiction.
Thing is, Xbox One has TWO...count 'em...TWO iterations before it that have allowed vertical positioning. In case you missed the amount, I'll repeat it. TWO!! Plus, while Microsoft decided to jump on the console gaming bandwagon AFTER Sony decided it would take over with the Playstation (1), both the PS2 and the PS3 are capable of vertical positioning.
Thus, positioning a system vertically, while not necessarily my cup of tea, has become a standard expectation for people when figuring out the best location for their console.
I would bet you hard-earned American legal tender that when the Xbox One was announced, people looking to buy the system immediately figured out how they would situate it in their wall units, entertainment centers, etc....and at least a fraction of those people planned on placing the unit vertically.
Will this kill their desire to get the Xbox One? Will they cancel their preorders? Probably not. But for folks who have very little space, and not much money for new furniture to reconfigure their gaming space? This will prove a monumental inconvenience.
You shouldn't worry about ME whining, dude. Worry about the people who buy the Xbox One, NOT taking the "doesn't go vertical" issue into play, they shove it into an entertainment system vertically, and start WHINING that the system has problems.
But it's pretty asinine, and outright idiotic, of Microsoft to require the Xbox One be situated horizontally, when at least one previous iteration could be vertical.
I mean, I know for an absolute FAAAAAAAAAACT that on launch day, at least a hundred dimwits are going to get their Xbox One, situate it vertically, and have problems. And unless 1) it doesn't break it and 2) they have an alternative location for it near the TV (that meets all the crazy measurements the manual requires)...they're gonna be SOL.
And then they're gonna turn into babies and yell at Microsoft for ruining their fun. Microsoft, on the other hand, could have fixed that...but don't seem to be.
I heard the story concept isn't exactly post-apocalyptic, but is about some massive world event where society changes...
I wonder, with the amount of people who think Call of Duty is lame because of how linear and hand-holding it is...would it be more engaging if it were more open-world? I feel like a story concept like Ghosts has might lend itself to more interest if it were presented in an open-world setting, so you could explore how the planet's changed at your own pace, rather than "go here, go there, shoot the hinges, command the dog, etc."
@MaddenBowler10 I gotta say, though...the original Call of Duty games, much like the original Medal of Honor games, had the benefit of being "historical." They were intense because they told stories from wars in the past, that really couldn't be told without listening to interviews, and even those interviews never really put you in their shoes to feel what they felt.
The newer Call of Duty and Medal of Honor games took a big risk leaping into present day, but...are these stories that can't be told by real footage of real people shooting and killing each other in places like Afghanistan?
@Doom_HellKnight Ya know...that's actually a really smart way to put this. I'll give you a lot of respect for putting it this way, :-) They're really not that engaging, from what I've heard, but all in all, they probably don't need to be. They at least do what they do reasonably well.
You've gotta admit, though...for a game as short as Ghosts is likely to be...the dog is going to be SERIOUSLY gimmicky. I mean, Chop in GTA 5 is kind of a gimmick, but...you don't have to give Chop one ounce of attention if you don't want to beyond maybe one mission where you have to control him to find some enemy. But Call of Duty will not only require you to pay attention and use the dog, but hand-hold you through caring for it.
Which just reminds me of the Xbox One reveal presentation, where the presenters had to TELL US that we would be emotionally connected to the dog in the new Call of Duty. Hilarious.
@mondoben Really think that's a great idea. Years ago, when games were static and unchangeable, you could leave a review how it was, because the game wasn't going to get better or worse. These days, DLC and patches are so common for games, people rarely play a game that hasn't been changed since launch. And in some cases, games are changed so drastically, a game in its current state barely resembles what it was at launch.
I absolutely adore the fact that people WITHIN Microsoft are disagreeing and arguing on how to view this...
By far my favorite part of this piece is hearing this line, ""I don't like it…it disrespects the teams that have put thousands of hours (already) into the development of the product. Sure, it's cheeky, but I don't care for it myself," said Hryb in September."
Thousands of hours, Hryb? What part took thousands of hours? The "Xbox" part? Gosh, yeah, I'm sure that required hundreds of Macaroni Grill and Starbucks runs to come up with "let's make the system square, call it a 'box' and market it with a buzz letter like X!!! GEEEEEEEEENIUS!"
What part involved thousands of hours? Deciding to make the THIRD iteration of your system (the first of which not coming with a number) the ONE!!!!?!?!?! Because, Microsoft loves to misnumber their things?"
First Xbox...we'll call it...Xbox.
Second Xbox...well, we have to compete with PS3, so we need to throw a 3 in there...ooh! Xbox 360!
Third Xbox...hmmm, this is tricky now...we've already used a 3...let's go back to basics...Xbox ONE!
*sighs*
Ya know...by the time Microsoft figures out the proper way to do console gaming...Sony will have figured out how to support keyboards and mice and word processing software on their consoles. Any chance Microsoft can just stick to computing and let Sony handle the GAMING? That'd be great.
cardinalphoenix's comments