Moderator: Thanas
I'm not sure what can be worse than manufacturer TV software, to be honest. Maybe even expanding googles death grip would be better!Vendetta wrote:We'll see whether Google TV achieves actual penetration on TV sets as a standardised smart interface, but I suspect it's more likely it'll just drive what the existing smart features of smart TVs do.
It sounds more like MS is trying to kill the second hand market and shift the blame to the consumer. "It's not out fault the second hand market it dead. Blame the people not selling their games". Maybe twist the knife a bit with digital sales that are below the price retailers are charging for the used games, and thus below the price being charged for the same game on other platforms.TheFeniX wrote:There's a bit more on the resale frontIt will be nice for publishers like Microsoft and EA, which keep their games at high price points for an extended time after release to finally force the used market to do the same, and take all the money while doing so, while ensuring the original purchasers gets shit on a trade-in (more so than usual) so Gamestop can continue earning a profit. That Microsoft is taking a cut at all is fucking hilarious.The retailer sets the price—within limits—and the eventual sale is divided three ways, with the split percentage determined by Microsoft.
That percentage may be as low as 10% for retailers.
I thought it sounded creepy enough when it looked like a bunch of features, all of which sounded useful on their own, combined into something that sounded a lot like the screens from 1984. But, since the features all sound useful on their own, I doubted MS would write the software to tie them all together into a spy device. With that patent, I'm not so sure.In the mean time, you can also have your Kinect spy on you.I can already hear the "but if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" idiot brigade and I haven't even bothered looking at comment sections.The patent application, filed under the heading “Content Distribution Regulation by Viewing User,” proposes to use cameras and sensors like those in the Xbox 360 Kinect controller to monitor, count and in some cases identify the people in a room watching television, movies and other content. The filing refers to the technology as a “consumer detector.”
In one scenario, the system would then charge for the television show or movie based on the number of viewers in the room. Or, if the number of viewers exceeds the limits laid out by a particular content license, the system would halt playback unless additional viewing rights were purchased.
We could write code to turn our camera off when you are watching porn. But instead we will do something that requires we keep our camera on and watching you while you masturbate.The system could also take into account the age of viewers, limiting playback of mature content to adults, for example. This patent application doesn’t explain how that would work, but a separate Microsoft patent application last year described a system for using sensors to estimate age based on the proportions of their body.
Lets spy on people to make sure they get fatBut why get worked up when you can sit back and get "achievements" by pounding down Doritos's and Mountain Dew while watching TV.
Do any of these new consoles play games? You know, except for some CoD after you've had your fill of TV and Sports.
Well no shit. That's why I went and had a look at the actual source document and made my own decision based on that information. If it doesn't get implemented, that's great. While they have 'monitoring consumers in their own houses' on their drawing board, they can get fucked. You can try and frame the reporting of it however you like, but there is a freely available document which Microsoft actually wrote stating they want to do invasive shit.Stark wrote:Owning a patent doesn't really mean anything, and since 99% of everything everyone has ever said about the Xbox has been entirely made up Chinese whispers stuff I'm not paying any attention until someone credible says something.
If the Kinect must stay plugged in at all times, the only thing MS needs to do to start is spying on people is change the software with an update. If the Kinect could be unplugged, all this privacy worry would die down quickly if MS would just come out and say that the Xbox One will work without it.In fact, the Kinect will be used for that most fundamental of tasks: turning the whole thing on. Xbox One utilizes multiple power states; it can thus ramp up as needed and consume different amounts of juice depending on use, whether games or movies. And it also possesses a low-power standby mode, allowing Xbox Live and game updates to be pushed to the Xbox One overnight — or whenever the box knows your usage is lowest — without keeping the console all the way on. (Don’t worry; you can still play a single-player game without being connected to the Internet.) It also means that when you walk into your room and say “Xbox on,” the Kinect sensor hears you and turns on your entire setup via infrared blast: TV, Xbox One, even your cable box.
I think they're still in the "throw features at the consumer and see what sticks" phase.Stark wrote:I'm not sure what can be worse than manufacturer TV software, to be honest. Maybe even expanding googles death grip would be better!Vendetta wrote:We'll see whether Google TV achieves actual penetration on TV sets as a standardised smart interface, but I suspect it's more likely it'll just drive what the existing smart features of smart TVs do.
For a while now I've been hearing that the main reason that the prices of digital version of PC games are very similar to the boxed copy is that retailers threaten to not stock games where the digital version is cheaper. So publishers give in because they need the retail sales.Stark wrote:That already happened years ago. Their bizarre system seems more like a result of trying to marry digital distribution realities to their need to keep physical shops on-side to move their console. I bet they'd love to use a framework everyone is a-ok with like steam.
Yeah that's all great and all but you are talking about a consumer base that lives on facebook and the rest of the internet. Clearly the current and future customer base has no issue with this "invasion of privacy".Ford Prefect wrote:And I could put duct tape over the camera. The issue isn't what it actually does or doesn't do, but rather that the corporation behind it thinks huge invasions of privacy are good business. It's like how my concern regarding the digital property rights isn't whatever hypothetical money I'd have to pay, but rather letting Microsoft redefine how we engage with things that we purchase.
Allowing the console to work without its bundled control accessory would defeat the purpose of including it in the box. Imagine if the Wii could function without the Wiimote. Devs would have had to design games not knowing whether the player was using a Wiimote or a standard gamepad. Wiimote functionality would have been reduced to a token gimmick, the sole selling point of the console would have been undermined, and almost no one would have bought one. The only way to replicate the Wii's success in introducing a new control interface is to make it an integral part of the console, whether or not there is a technical need for it to be.bilateralrope wrote:If the Kinect must stay plugged in at all times, the only thing MS needs to do to start is spying on people is change the software with an update. If the Kinect could be unplugged, all this privacy worry would die down quickly if MS would just come out and say that the Xbox One will work without it.
Ok, so.Starglider wrote:No, he said that total sales of 7th gen consoles (PS3 + Wii + X360) will be approx 300M and expected total sales of 8th gen consoles will be at least a third more than that. Which is completely reasonable assuming no devestating economic crash or total replacement of consoles by a different technology.Kuja wrote:I mean...if I'm reading this right,
Sales are accumulated over the whole decade from launch (usually with some sales continuing even after that in developing markets). 2006/2007 might have been nice but after that were the crash and recession years. It is establishment orthodoxy that the economy will always return to a stable long term trend (with the careful guidance of our central bankers), so it is axiomatic (to mainstream analysts) that 2014 to 2024 will be similar in total to 2006 to 2016. The sales gains come from income growth particularly in developing countries, increased device capability and the cohort of consumers plugged into gaming and media devices steadily expanding. Also entertainment suffers less than other industries in recessions, because people want escapism (and likely have more free time).TheGreekDollmaker wrote:The economy is shittier then it was in 2006-7, all the sectors in the US (except Oil and Gas and government, are declining, unemployment and suicides are at Great Depression era levels, the place where I live in has at certain places 75% unemployment, the EU is in the deep red...
I know plenty of people who autobuy the latest iPhone / iPad / iThing on release, regardless of cost. I think there's plenty of discretionary income around, just a question of can consoles still compete for gadget spend.This goes for all console btw. There is no way that in the middle of this depression that anybody, except the hardcore, will be willing to spent money on a new console.
That complaint has been made about every single console release in video game history. You are not an early adopter, we get it. Personally I bought an Xbox360 just so I could play Ace Combat 6, everything else was a bonus.Why should I buy the Wii U, Xbox One or PS4 for a higher price and with virtually no games
If the Kinect is in the box with the Xbox One, but the rest of the console can work without it, why can't developers assume that everybody has one when they know that everyone with the Xbox did purchase a Kinect ?Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:Allowing the console to work without its bundled control accessory would defeat the purpose of including it in the box. Imagine if the Wii could function without the Wiimote. Devs would have had to design games not knowing whether the player was using a Wiimote or a standard gamepad. Wiimote functionality would have been reduced to a token gimmick, the sole selling point of the console would have been undermined, and almost no one would have bought one. The only way to replicate the Wii's success in introducing a new control interface is to make it an integral part of the console, whether or not there is a technical need for it to be.bilateralrope wrote:If the Kinect must stay plugged in at all times, the only thing MS needs to do to start is spying on people is change the software with an update. If the Kinect could be unplugged, all this privacy worry would die down quickly if MS would just come out and say that the Xbox One will work without it.
Yeah there really is no difference between a camera which tracks how many people are in your house automatically and someone deliberately mentioning they're with certain people on Facebook. None at all.Havok wrote:Yeah that's all great and all but you are talking about a consumer base that lives on facebook and the rest of the internet. Clearly the current and future customer base has no issue with this "invasion of privacy".
At least in Australia, that is sort of but not quite the case in regards to land, which is sort of but not quite owned by the Commonwealth government. However, nobody owns personal property except you. Basically.Havok wrote:And also doesn't the law technically break down that you are leasing things you buy? Like books and stuff? And that you don't actually "own" them?
InsaneTD wrote:Don't think this had been posted yet and my apologies if it has.
http://www.slashgear.com/xbox-one-used- ... -24283449/
How big is the usual price difference between a new copy of that game and a second hand copy during the first month after that games release ?By running all transactions through the cloud system, Microsoft and the publisher of the game will automatically get a percentage of the resale figure. Exactly what that cut will be – and what price the retailers will be selling the games for – is unclear; MCV’s sources indicate that stores will be able to set their own figures, but Console Deals‘ sources suggest that Microsoft will permit at most a 10-percent discount from the game’s recommended retail price (RRP).
Oh, they will make a lot of noise. But we should all know how these video game boycotts turn out by now. Especially when I'm seeing a lot of complaining from Steam usersNonetheless, if the leaks are true, the policies are unlikely to meet with a positive reaction from gamers and – as Don Reisinger wrote earlier this week – could give some cause to rethink upgrading to the new console.
It sounds like people could share games by sharing their Xbox Live account.Stark wrote:It's a bit sad that their lust to shut down the extremely lucrative used market means they apparently didn't bother building in simple ways to lend games, which would assauge people who believe they actually own games etc.
