MindFreak Posted March 25, 2013 Posted March 25, 2013 Very wrong. The first x in Xbox seems thinner and too far from the other letters. Also, the current logo looks cooler.
Retro_Link Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 (edited) What a fail... http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/04/05/microsoft-creative-director-on-always-online-deal-with-it Microsoft Creative Director on Always Online: 'Deal With It' In the wake of new purported details about the next Xbox's always-online requirement, Microsoft Studios' creative director has spoken out on Twitter about negative reactions to the prospect. Adam Orth's tweets are now protected, but a poster on NeoGAF saved them for prosperity: Orth also got into a minor spat with BioWare employee Manheer Heir. "Sorry, I don't get the drama around having an 'always-on' console," he said. "Every device is now 'always-on'. #dealwithit Edited April 5, 2013 by Retro_Link
Shorty Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Can you post the image a fifth time as I had not grasped the whole thing after just four :p
Daft Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Microsoft will learn lessons like Sony had to learn lessons and everyone will be all the better for it. Orthy sounds like a right asshole. Wouldn't like to be him when he walked into work today.
Retro_Link Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Can you post the image a fifth time as I had not grasped the whole thing after just four :pI know... my post was almost as much of a fail. :p (Had assumed they were all separate images and not joined to one white background)
Cube Posted April 5, 2013 Author Posted April 5, 2013 It's especially stupid as this started off as "banter" between him and a friend of his. It was especially stupid from both sides. When you represent a big company, you do not do that on a public place like Twitter. Even with it being banter, some of the stuff he said was especially stupid.
gaggle64 Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 There's an argument for always-online in this day and age. That guy sure ain't making it though.
Cube Posted April 5, 2013 Author Posted April 5, 2013 There's an argument for always-online in this day and age. That guy sure ain't making it though. I can see points for "no" but no points for "yes". I can understand "online to activate" arguments - especially as so many games have important day 1 patches, but certainly not "always online".
Grazza Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Thing is, you need electricty in order to use a vacuum cleaner, just as you need a phone connection in order to use a mobile phone. To date, it has not been necessary to have an internet connection for a games console, and it never should. To do so just makes them less convenient for us, not more so. We'd be making a rod for our backs, but why? A better experience if you're connected? Great. More versatility? Fine. A one-off registration? Acceptable to me, although there will still be some who lose out. But not mandatory - it's just crazy. Adam Orth is coming across as incredibly petulant if he can't understand why people wouldn't buy the next Xbox over this.
Gio001 Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Oh dear!! This kind of attitude ain't gonna sell consoles. Especially when Sony are going all out to please developers and customers with the PS4.
Choze Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Well this blew up... Don't think its true though. 'Always online' in the leaked stuff is not elaborated on when it comes to DRM. If it was there I am sure MS would promote this to developers. Capcom would love it.
Ashley Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 Microsoft will learn lessons like Sony had to learn lessons and everyone will be all the better for it. Orthy sounds like a right asshole. Wouldn't like to be him when he walked into work today. I want a gif of you trying to spin this for them at work As you said though, Sony became arrogant and had a fall and Nintendo did so years ago. Part of 'growing up' in this industry I suppose.
Captain Falcon Posted April 5, 2013 Posted April 5, 2013 I was browsing a thread over at another popular gaming site, you know which one but why give them more free advertising here, when I came across this gif which I thought was rather amusing, especially the end.
Cube Posted April 6, 2013 Author Posted April 6, 2013 Although with regards with Diablo 3 and SimCity...weren't those both massive successes in terms of sales?
Shorty Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 Hm, the rumours said "always on", and an internet connection required to start a game. Not "always online". Orth also said "Every device is now 'always-on'", which to me suggests a kind of standby mode, or the way your phone/tablet is always on and ready to go. I can't see anywhere stating that the next Xbox might require a permanent internet connection.
Choze Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 (edited) In the USA that term supposedly does mean you need a connection to run basic functionality. I thought the same as you earlier. But MS's very carefully worded official response is not a denial and other developers are suggesting you need a connection. Lets not just look at it one way. I think some people will see at as an good thing as they did with xbox live. It would make it like steam and casuals may like the whole digital thing. MS have been going in this direction for some time now. Look at windows 8 and Office 365. Although with regards with Diablo 3 and SimCity...weren't those both massive successes in terms of sales? Diablo 3 certainly is. Sim City has done well too but not in diablo territory. Both really should have offline modes. I personally had problems with Starcraft 2 WOL myself. I know its meant to playable offline but I couldnt get it to work when i needed it... Kept asking me to log in. This online required for single player offline stuff is a mess. This is a major area where pc games are worse than console games nowadays. Lets not forget that most pc gaming is on laptops nowadays. Here in the UK ISP's make mistakes which can mean no connection for days. Edited April 6, 2013 by Choze
Rowan Posted April 6, 2013 Posted April 6, 2013 For the enthusiast it's a shame that Microsoft look set to go down this route. There are concerns that having digital downloads might mean we might not be able to redownload titles in the future when the servers go down. So assuming that this always online is going to poll an Xbox server, it could mean that in 10 years time the 720 is going to be a useless box as the server to connect to might be offline. For the mainstream consumer this will probably not deter them too much from buying the new console. Either way, Microsoft must have something up their sleeve to allow them to get away with always online. My guess is a subscription contract with a low upfront fee ($/£99). Perhaps tied in with TV channels over the internet.
Dcubed Posted April 7, 2013 Posted April 7, 2013 (edited) Oh hey. Seems that Paul Thurrott is corrobating the rumour (see from 54 mins onwards) so that means that it's probably true... He also mentions that Microsoft are launching a $99 Xbox 360, codenamed "Stingray", this November alongside Durango, as a means of making up for the Durango lacking 360 backwards compatibility and that it's around $500 for the console or $300 with a subscription subsidy. For the enthusiast it's a shame that Microsoft look set to go down this route. There are concerns that having digital downloads might mean we might not be able to redownload titles in the future when the servers go down. So assuming that this always online is going to poll an Xbox server, it could mean that in 10 years time the 720 is going to be a useless box as the server to connect to might be offline. For the mainstream consumer this will probably not deter them too much from buying the new console. Either way, Microsoft must have something up their sleeve to allow them to get away with always online. My guess is a subscription contract with a low upfront fee ($/£99). Perhaps tied in with TV channels over the internet. That's the worst part of it for me. It effectively means that all of these games for the console will cease to exist, the moment that the Durango's servers get shut down. It's tantamount to book burning and for that reason alone I would refuse to buy the console Edited April 7, 2013 by Dcubed
Choze Posted April 7, 2013 Posted April 7, 2013 (edited) Thurrott would know. He is a big personality on MS's side. Its also awkward as the Ps4 itself was revealed late. The spec leaks recently pretty much meant the PS4 reveal was too late itself. The HDMI in feature will be a big unique selling point. Pop ups and notifications while you watch tv. People can message you on skype while watching and recording Sky/freeview simultaneously. Still doesnt need always online. I am struggling to see where it fits? besides getting rid of second hand games and less convenience. Isnt BC doable on the 720? I wonder how long before MS's version of Google glass is revealed? Starting to think it will be unveiled alongside 720 hence the delay. It would give them a leg up on PS4 unless Sony partner with Google or make their own. Spec wise the PS4 is 50% more powerful when looking at the GPU. Not counting other factors such as RAM. On the other hand the hardware is much cheaper in 720. DDR3 RAM and a low powered GPU will make for massive savings. It will be a very affordable console for MS compared tot he 360 at least. Overall MS's positioning is interesting. You have hardware that is decent but falls clearly short of the PS4. Creating a larger difference than usual between 3 systems technically. Its much more compelling hardware than the recent Nintendo machines and perhaps that will help for casuals? They probably are focusing on Kinect, glasses and Hdmi in as their selling points. I think they will use these to justify always online. I am puzzled as to why the reveals are late since we know so much about these consoles before their reveals. Edited April 7, 2013 by Choze
Cube Posted April 7, 2013 Author Posted April 7, 2013 I thought my expectation for the 360 couldn't get lower, but it has. I can't recall a single good thing I've heard about it so far. Another thing. Either the contact for the lower price is for four or five years, or Xbox live is getting a significant price increase.
madeinbeats Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 Begs the question; if this is how much a weaker console costs, then how much is the PS4 going to cost or how much are Sony prepared to lose on it and where do they plan on making the difference up? It's like these companies want to make gaming a commodity. Sorry, but that's a step too far for me; gaming to me should be a light-hearted hobby, not a monthly contract.
Choze Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 Thurrott is just guessing regarding the costs. Apparently there is a contract offer on the xbox? This is USA only? I dont recall ever seeing such deals here without mobile phones involved.
Recommended Posts