The Xbox One

11213141618

Comments

  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited June 2013
    puzzlebox wrote: »
    Wow.

    Taking the words out of my mouth. From "it can't work without" to "it will" in mere seconds. This is practically an Electronic Arts level of costumer contempt. But I'm happy for the Microsoft 'fanbase'. Looks like they're getting a decent console after all. And, honestly, we don't want a winner in the console wars because monopolies_just_stink.

    What saddens me though is that once again, the customer was NOT listened to, at all, whatever they say now. The outrage these last months meant nothing to them, not one word. Only when Sony whupped their ass at E3, Microsoft was willing to think again. Had Sony presented equal bullshit, we'd be in a very different situation right now.

    It's dated. Badly. And a lot of the features it introduced are widely despised (quick time events, anyone?).

    You know, it's funny. The other day I was playing Tomb Raider on a PS3 at a friends' house, discussing whether I should or should not get back into console gaming with the PS4. When I complained about all the QTE bullshit in that game, he flat out said that a dislike of QTEs means that I should not buy a console. Truth?
  • edited June 2013
    he flat out said that a dislike of QTEs means that I should not buy a console. Truth?

    Those have become more and more popular in all modern games. But they are present in modern PC games too (well console ports). But not nearly in enough games to avoid consoles completely. You just need to be careful. Very careful.
    But also consider that consoles are your only option if you want to play major games and still avoid Origin, Steam and others.
  • edited June 2013
    The voice actor for Ryo sounded like he couldn't be bothered reading the script...Unless he is looking for sailors.
  • JenniferJennifer Moderator
    edited June 2013
    coolsome wrote: »
    The voice actor for Ryo sounded like he couldn't be bothered reading the script...Unless he is looking for sailors.
    The voice acting in general is pretty awful in the Shenmue games (in the English translations at least). It's definitely the worst part of both games (unless you manage to get the European Dreamcast version of Shenmue II, which has English subtitles and Japanese voices... which is the far better way to play in my opinion).

    It's also true that they are really dated (and the control scheme is really awkward). Also, they originally planned it to be many chapters, and then condensed the second one when the first one didn't sell well. You can really tell that the second one was meant to be multiple chapters because the pacing is off (especially at the last part, where it seems to end when it is just beginning).

    I still like both games though. The mini-games are pretty fun, and the storyline is interesting. I really hope they'll be able to finish the story somehow. If not through a game, then possibly they can finish it through a movie (like they did with the Shenmue I story in Japan), or with a manga (or even a western style comic book).
  • edited June 2013
    He was right about family sharing. The fanboys are pissed and blaming fellow gamers. I've seen a bunch of backlash already.

    I'm still really concerned about the running background programs(apps, TV, camera) and how it will affect games and potential. It seems to me that the Xbox performance is going to be worse than PS4 regardless.
  • edited June 2013
    If the trading and sharing still applies to digital-purchased games, then we're probably good
  • edited June 2013
    No we're not. I'm not buying the dang thing.
    Oh wait, so maybe yes we are. :)


    Wouldn't matter what MS does. I'm not buying their console. It's not fanboyism; I just don't like it. It's too big, too expensive, and has an unnecessarily huge camera peripheral.
  • edited June 2013
    Family sharing was completely axed today as far as I know.
  • edited June 2013
    I'm hearing rumours (IE: it's been mentioned in several articles reporting this) that the reversal has been planned for months. If that's true, then holy shit that's a hell of a marketing tactic.
  • edited June 2013
    I'm hearing rumours (IE: it's been mentioned in several articles reporting this) that the reversal has been planned for months. If that's true, then holy shit that's a hell of a marketing tactic.

    Cannot have been planned that long. They wouldn't have this huge conference and E3 with this DRM shit when they planned the reversal already.
  • edited June 2013
    Yeah, even if they were forced not to hint at the reversal, I don't think they would have planned two entire conferences primarily around features that they were going to axe.

    Then again, maybe that's why they were so unclear on the details
  • edited June 2013
    I'm hearing rumours (IE: it's been mentioned in several articles reporting this) that the reversal has been planned for months. If that's true, then holy shit that's a hell of a marketing tactic.

    I kinda figured that's what happened. After all, any publicity is good publicity, and the Xbox One has been on everyone's mind ever since Adam Orth, if not sooner once the initial "always on" rumors started pouring out. They couldn't have asked for more publicity than this.
  • edited June 2013
    I'm hearing rumours (IE: it's been mentioned in several articles reporting this) that the reversal has been planned for months. If that's true, then holy shit that's a hell of a marketing tactic.

    If that's the case, Microsoft needs to fire its marketing department.

    Speaking of rumours, sources are starting to report that family sharing would have only been an hour long demo for your family members, not access to the full game.
  • edited June 2013
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    Cannot have been planned that long. They wouldn't have this huge conference and E3 with this DRM shit when they planned the reversal already.

    Yeah. This couldn't have been a marketing tactic. The vast majority of users go by their first impression. Playing the win-me-over card would have been an awful, awful decision. It doesn't really matter whether it was planned or they really were going to implement those features. They deserve to lose either way.

    Horrible horrible choices on their part.
  • edited June 2013
    Hehe his name is Phil Fish.
  • edited June 2013

    They do. But only if they will sell 6 Million copies or more.
  • edited June 2013

    What are you talking about? Minecraft is literally the entire indie scene! True story.
  • edited June 2013
    I get the feeling that Microsoft is trying to change for the better, but they're doing it in the worst possible way. XBLIG was a few genuinely good games in a sea of poorly made, low quality Minecraft ripoffs, avatar games, and other stuff made in a weekend and sold for a dollar. Instead of enforcing some kind of standard of quality, they kill the entire idea of XBLIG. Problem solved in the worst possible way. How about people complaining about the $10,000 patch fee? This is a legitimate problem they could easily solve by lowering the patch fee for Arcade developers. But Microsoft decides "well, they'll be able to afford the patch fee if they have a publisher, so from now on, all indie developers MUST have a publisher". Problem solved in the worst possible way.
  • edited June 2013
    It's so surreal, since XBLA basically brought about the modern concept of an "Indie Game." But the industry has evolved far too much since then for Microsoft to recapture that without evolving too
  • edited June 2013
    LuigiHann wrote: »
    It's so surreal, since XBLA basically brought about the modern concept of an "Indie Game
    The Indie Games Festival has been in existence since 1998, and Darwinia predates the Xbox 360 by over 8 months. Here is a blog post about indie games from the summer of 2004.
  • edited June 2013
    It definitely brought them more into the spotlight of mainstream gamers who normally wouldn't even hear of them.
  • edited June 2013
    I made a point to say "modern concept" because indie games have always been a thing on PC, so the 360 definitely didn't invent that, but I feel like the way we use the term now is influenced quite a bit by their presence on consoles. Thanks for the info on how far back the phrase goes, I wasn't sure how long ago it came into use.
  • SydSyd
    edited June 2013
    So, rumors are going around that Microsoft is going to announce indie self-publishing at the Build conference. I suppose we'll see if there's any substance to these rumors in a few days.
  • edited June 2013
    Syd wrote: »
    So, rumors are going around that Microsoft is going to announce indie self-publishing at the Build conference. I suppose we'll see if there's any substance to these rumors in a few days.

    Considering that many independant developers seems to have some kind of horror story of working with Microsoft, would that even help?
  • edited June 2013
    Considering that many independant developers seems to have some kind of horror story of working with Microsoft, would that even help?
    No self-publishing is literally THE reason people have horror stories in the first place, some might even say the ONLY reason. Here is an excellent article on the matter, I highly recommend reading it.
  • edited June 2013
    No self-publishing is literally THE reason people have horror stories in the first place, some might even say the ONLY reason. Here is an excellent article on the matter, I highly recommend reading it.

    But is self publishing going to solve the $10,000 patch fee problem? Or Microsoft screwing the developer over on advertising? Microsoft has never been kind to indie developers that aren't Notch.
  • edited June 2013
    It's true that Microsoft allowing self-publishing on their platform will not remove all problems with the platform. Microsoft will still have the patching issue, it will still rebuff attempts to ALLOW developers to give free content updates to their own games, it will still have weird requirements for achievements, and it will still be denying developers the ability to set their own prices and run promotions.

    BUT, they'll have also removed the biggest and most corrupt barrier to entry in terms of Xbox One digital games, and that's a big deal. With PC, Xbox, and Playstation next gen all having the same architecture, ports are not going to be a difficult thing, and removing the requirement that a developer MUST share their revenue with a publisher ON ALL PLATFORMS just to get on Xbox would mean that MS have taken away the one thing which makes not releasing on Xbox AT ALL seem like a better way to go.
  • edited June 2013
    The grand Microsoft backpedal continues. Remember Games with Gold and how we all laughed at the pitiful selection of games? Games with Gold has launched with the flagship game of Defense Grid, and an excuse that Microsoft never actually said that Halo 3 and Assassin's Creed 2 would be the first games out the gate.
  • edited June 2013
    It's such a weird thing for them to do. I get the logic of not wanting to blow their load too early, but wouldn't they want to lead strong? I think a lot of people were assuming that Halo and AC would be the first of many strong titles, not the strongest titles.

    Apparently you have a limited amount of time to download these games as well. It's not tied to your account forever like PS+. MS is showing that they have no intention of competing with PS+.
  • edited July 2013
    But is self publishing going to solve the $10,000 patch fee problem? Or Microsoft screwing the developer over on advertising? Microsoft has never been kind to indie developers that aren't Notch.

    Well, at least the 360 is free of it so far.
  • edited July 2013
    The grand Microsoft backpedal continues. Remember Games with Gold and how we all laughed at the pitiful selection of games? Games with Gold has launched with the flagship game of Defense Grid, and an excuse that Microsoft never actually said that Halo 3 and Assassin's Creed 2 would be the first games out the gate.
    Well, um, they didn't. It's not an "excuse" to say you shouldn't be angry at them for breaking promises they didn't actually make.
  • edited July 2013
    Well, um, they didn't. It's not an "excuse" to say you shouldn't be angry at them for breaking promises they didn't actually make.

    Still, they made absolutely no attempts to point out to everyone who was covering this that "No guys, we're just using those games as EXAMPLES of what we're doing, those won't actually be the games we're launching first." I still say it's backpedalling, those games were pretty much the punchline to this entire promotion.
  • edited July 2013
    I actually have to agree on that. They specifically put those two games as two games that would be on the Gold for Games thing. It's basically false advertisement, especially for those who actually signed up for Gold now. Now, sure, they eventually *might* make it, eventually, but it's just a bait and switch thing at the moment. Kind of a dick move if you ask me.

    It's kind of like saying, hey, we'll promise you a pizza if you sign up for our television and Internet services, only to then release the pizza after several weeks of not having anything to eat but ramen noodles.
  • edited July 2013
    Being fair but while I'm not sure if they promised AC2 & Halo 3 at E3. When you show them as the free games you are showing off then you are basically making it look like you will have them as the first games. Lets go back to E3 2012. Sony got to PS Plus, they went straight out and said Red Dead Redemption would be their game for September. Xbox tries to one up PS Plus by saying they will get 4 year old games a month then when it gets to July they find out that even then they get a 3 year old Tower Defence game. It would be disappointing to be excited for Halo 3 & AC2 and instead find out you a Tower Defence game.
  • edited July 2013
    I actually think these will be the first game once the ONE is released.
    Is it released yet? I don't know. I don't care for failure.
  • edited July 2013
    More quality Microsoft backpedalling, folks. This time, they're backpedalling from their backpedal on Games with Gold, and will be giving away Assassin's Creed 2 on July 16th.
  • edited July 2013
    Isn't that a good thing?
  • edited July 2013
    Gman5852 wrote: »
    Isn't that a good thing?

    Depends on what you want to hear people complain about for the next several months; either GwG is a massive bait-and-switch, or Microsoft is severely out of touch with what people like about PS+.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.