I was at work, so I didn't get to watch the reveal. I've read alot of different articles on the reveal though, after the fact. I've watched as sites try sifting all the information, to try and understand what they told us. And, as they've gotten clarification from Microsoft execs over different things, and then watched as different exec's retracted what previous execs said.
I have no clue what the heck is going on with this thing. Well, it probably doesn't help that I'm getting old and senile though I will say, that I'm mostly negative on what I understand about the xbox one, at least up to this point.
It's my understanding that an MS exec stated that this thing would have to connect to the internet regularly, although not have to be online 100% of the time. I think the interval he thought it would be was probably going to be every 24 hours. Then, I believe another exec came back and said, its still "to be determined". Whether that meant, the interval, or the mandatory interval online checks overall, I have no clue.
I also seem to recall someone from Microsoft talking about how they have enabled developers to be able to make always online requirements on a game by game basis, and that they are encouraging developers to actually do it.
Well, for the record, I'm a person that did not buy Diablo 3 or Sim City 5, specfically because they required an internet connection. I have an always on, rock stable internet connection too. I just refuse to play single player games that require me to be online all the time. I guess you could say it's the principle of the thing, as silly and cliched as that sounds. Heh, I remember posting in the sc5 thread about this always on crap most likely being the future of gaming, and what I thought about it. I'm sure it sounds stupid, or crazy, to most forward thinking people though. It's just how I am though.
The whole thing about installing games, and guesses as to the used game market, I'm of 2 minds about.
Personally, I always install the games that let me to the hard drive. I'd welcome not having to have the disc in the drive to play the game. And, if a friend came over to show off a game (which has happened before), I don't mind him logging into his account on my machine to be able to do just that.
Until I hear exactly how the used game market is going to work, all I can do is speculate. My
guess would be that the used game market would be going online, to sell the game back to Microsoft. Then, your physical copy of the game becomes worthless, as it turns into a digital distribution only kind of thing. Then, Microsoft would be able to resell you're copy to someone else, who would be able to download and play your old game.
Something like this would be both good and bad. Microsoft would be able to give part of the proceeds back to the original publisher. I don't see that as a bad thing at all. But, it would mean that Microsoft would have a monopoly on used sells. I DO see that as a bad thing. (I could swear I saw an article stating that this theory was close to right, either last night or today. Thinking that was probably a dream I had last night, instead of a real arcticle, heh)
I will note that this sort of thing would only nominally affect me personally. I never sell my games. And, most (probably 80%) of my game purchases are new. I don't particularly like the precedent it sets though.
When it's all said and done, my thinking is that Microsoft is probably trying collect all the social gamers that made the wii so popular, in addition to the normal the normal core gamers, with this big focus on the tv aspect of the box. I don't mind that so much, as long as it doesn't get in the way of my gaming. Now, I have no interest in all the shiny addon stuff myself. If, however, it doesn't get in my way, or detract from my experience...so be it. But, the real question is, will it actually attract the social gamers? I think the features would make it interesting to them, sure. But, will they be willing to pay whatever price Microsoft plans to charge for this system?
My guess is no. But, I guess we'll have to wait and see.
My gut reaction to all this mess at the moment - I don't particularly want this system. Of course, alot could change between now and launch, so I'm not discounting it out completely.....yet. If not much changes between now and launch, I will probably pass on this system.
People will buy them anyway. I've given up hoping that the market will put a stop to stuff like this. It won't.
I gave up when Diablo 3 and Sim City 5 sold like gangbusters. I knew they would. But, some little part of my held out hope. Those 2 games pretty much crushed that hope of there being a notable number of like minded gamers out there though.
I can't wait for the first hack to remotely view someone's Kinect feed. RAWR!
Ok, I can't understand how Microsoft putting a camera and microphone in your living room, which you have no control over, doesn't freak more people out.
Perhaps there will be absolutely no way for it to be remote hacked. Perhaps no one at microsoft will ever abuse it, or even be able to abuse this.
Even so,
I STILL DON'T WANT THIS
Paranoid? I'll admit it. Proud of it. I'm sure I'm quite irrational about it. But this stance is not changing.
Right now, it's still up to Microsoft and Sony to wow me. Microsoft will need to change quite a bit (or at the least, clarify things in a way that I like) to keep me as a customer. Sony will have to prove to me that they aren't planning any shenanigans like what Microsoft appears to be planning in order to keep my money. Sony currently has the lead at the moment, mostly because all this is still unknown for them.
If the Xbox One is as bad as I think it will be, and Sony ends up following suit...the Wii U will suddenly look like a real winner to be. And thats sad, because up to this point, I've always owned all systems, and thought all of them were valid gaming sytems. If I turn into a 1 system household, there will be 1 more sad clown on this planet.
And yeah, I rambled on way to long. Sorry.