Xbox One Catch-all

MannishBoy wrote:
PaladinTom wrote:

My issue, is that I just do not see Microsoft copying the pricing structure of Steam - at least in the short term. Console games will remain $60 for the foreseeable future, whether they be disc based or download. If Sony maintains the momentum it now has, it could very well win the early years of the generation.

I bought Forza Horizon from MS over Black Friday for $15, a month after it was released, combined with a 3 month Gold card.

I fairly regularly have bought XBLA games for between 50-75% off.

Both Sony and MS have been showing evidence of getting the sale concept at times. I think these things will work themselves out, especially if you throw in the retail disc sales that will inevitably be happening on Amazon or the end caps of Target when they need to clear space for the next big game. At least on Xbox, those will be as good as buying online, and might be the GMG to to MS's Steam.

It's also worth noting that brand new games AAA games on Steam are not necessarily any cheaper than they are on consoles. Call of Duty Ghosts is available to pre-order for $60 right now, same as consoles.

I'm going to do a couple more comparisons, off the top of my head, and I promise I'm not cherry picking - I will report each one I think to look up:

Bioshock Infinite is on Amazon for ~$40 for 360 and PS3, $50 for PC (disc), $60 for PC (digital). It's $60 on Steam.

Tomb Raider is on Amazon for $30 for consoles, $40 for PC (digital), and is $50 on Steam.

I was going to do SimCity, but it's not on consoles and doesn't appear to be on Steam. Amazon's digital version is $20 more than on disc, though.

So the pricing structure of Steam is actually neutral and in some cases disadvantageous where newer games are concerned. I think where Steam really catches our attention is on Steam sales, which obviously rock, and I would like to see that kind of pricing implemented on consoles. And we may, because it's not simply competition that drives prices lower (although competition remains a factor on consoles, too, thanks to retailers still selling physical copies for now) - it's the desire to generate immediate revenue. The economic lessons from Steam sales are amazing and compelling. Doesn't mean MS/Sony have to do likewise, but they are undoubtedly paying attention.

Microsoft should hire that guy to do an hour chat about what the XB1 really does.

I can have 10 accounts on my XB1, but my family needs 3. With the other seven I can create accounts that I can use to loan games. I can call one Goodjer, and use it to loan games to people I know here, and just swap passwords when needed.

If you don't care about achievements, we can share a ton of games this way. So yeah, I could go PS4 and mail a disc to my brother, or go Xbox One and give him instant access from across the country.

Fedaykin98 wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
PaladinTom wrote:

My issue, is that I just do not see Microsoft copying the pricing structure of Steam - at least in the short term. Console games will remain $60 for the foreseeable future, whether they be disc based or download. If Sony maintains the momentum it now has, it could very well win the early years of the generation.

I bought Forza Horizon from MS over Black Friday for $15, a month after it was released, combined with a 3 month Gold card.

I fairly regularly have bought XBLA games for between 50-75% off.

Both Sony and MS have been showing evidence of getting the sale concept at times. I think these things will work themselves out, especially if you throw in the retail disc sales that will inevitably be happening on Amazon or the end caps of Target when they need to clear space for the next big game. At least on Xbox, those will be as good as buying online, and might be the GMG to to MS's Steam.

It's also worth noting that brand new games AAA games on Steam are not necessarily any cheaper than they are on consoles. Call of Duty Ghosts is available to pre-order for $60 right now, same as consoles.

I'm going to do a couple more comparisons, off the top of my head, and I promise I'm not cherry picking - I will report each one I think to look up:

Bioshock Infinite is on Amazon for ~$40 for 360 and PS3, $50 for PC (disc), $60 for PC (digital). It's $60 on Steam.

Tomb Raider is on Amazon for $30 for consoles, $40 for PC (digital), and is $50 on Steam.

I was going to do SimCity, but it's not on consoles and doesn't appear to be on Steam. Amazon's digital version is $20 more than on disc, though.

So the pricing structure of Steam is actually neutral and in some cases disadvantageous where newer games are concerned. I think where Steam really catches our attention is on Steam sales, which obviously rock, and I would like to see that kind of pricing implemented on consoles. And we may, because it's not simply competition that drives prices lower (although competition remains a factor on consoles, too, thanks to retailers still selling physical copies for now) - it's the desire to generate immediate revenue. The economic lessons from Steam sales are amazing and compelling. Doesn't mean MS/Sony have to do likewise, but they are undoubtedly paying attention.

Release day sales don't come from directly from Steam. They come from 3rd part places like Green Man Gaming in the form of Steam codes. I payed lke $30 for Tomb Raider on release day.

IMAGE(http://i0.wp.com/www.geeksaresexy.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/xbox-one-playstation-4-console-comparison-chart1.jpg?resize=600%2C1855)

PaladinTom wrote:

If Sony maintains the momentum it now has, it could very well win the early years of the generation.

What is that worth? The Wii won the early years last gen, then the 360 did vis-a-vis the PS3, for a while. Now they've all come out the same, if not necessarily numbers-wise, then at least healthy and in it for another round.

Technologically, the Xbone and PS4 are nearly identical—in a couple years I'll bet you both platforms will be nearly indistinguishable in features, services, DRM options, prices, and so on.

A "winner" between the consoles at this point in the 21st century is facile. They don't exist in a vacuum—it was mobile gaming that won last generation. The Big Three are lucky to have another go at it (Facebook and OnLive lost), because this will be the last time in history dedicated gaming consoles will have any relevance. They either all win (and converge on being pretty much the same device), though I couldn't predict how in the face of smartphones, tablets, Apple TV, and who knows what else is evolving; or they all lose.

All consumers should actually worry about is if their console of choice does well enough attract plenty of publishers to put games out for it.

Unless these console makers are going to share profits with me, I could care less how they do outside of making sure I have games to enjoy.

Gumbie wrote:

Release day sales don't come from directly from Steam. They come from 3rd part places like Green Man Gaming in the form of Steam codes. I payed lke $30 for Tomb Raider on release day.

And since Amazon, Target, Walmart, etc can all sell discs, the sales can come from there. You're not stuck with the MS store with this particular solution.

Jayhawker wrote:

All consumers should actually worry about is if their console of choice does well enough attract plenty of publishers to put games out for it.

And where other people play those games in the case of multiplayer stuff.

Yeah, multiplayer is important, too.

I'm still calling it the XBone. Not as an insult or anything, because it is an inanimate object; it's just much funnier and it gives me delight to think that no one at Microsoft thought of that nickname before the reveal.

Jayhawker wrote:

Unless these console makers are going to share profits with me, I could care less how they do outside of making sure I have games to enjoy.

I get 20 MSP 29¢ each birthday!

Hey! My 5th Generation system was a Jaguar too! (and I still have it in the box).
IMAGE(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Atari-Jaguar-Console-Set.jpg)

Jayhawker wrote:

Microsoft should hire that guy to do an hour chat about what the XB1 really does.

I can have 10 accounts on my XB1, but my family needs 3. With the other seven I can create accounts that I can use to loan games. I can call one Goodjer, and use it to loan games to people I know here, and just swap passwords when needed.

If you don't care about achievements, we can share a ton of games this way. So yeah, I could go PS4 and mail a disc to my brother, or go Xbox One and give him instant access from across the country.

I really want this clarified as I would love to hear more about the "family" plan. There are a few goodjers around the country I would happily share sh*tty achievement games with:) That could be an incredible selling point.

SallyNasty wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

Microsoft should hire that guy to do an hour chat about what the XB1 really does.

I can have 10 accounts on my XB1, but my family needs 3. With the other seven I can create accounts that I can use to loan games. I can call one Goodjer, and use it to loan games to people I know here, and just swap passwords when needed.

If you don't care about achievements, we can share a ton of games this way. So yeah, I could go PS4 and mail a disc to my brother, or go Xbox One and give him instant access from across the country.

I really want this clarified as I would love to hear more about the "family" plan. There are a few goodjers around the country I would happily share sh*tty achievement games with:) That could be an incredible selling point.

http://penny-arcade.com/report/artic...

SallyNasty wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

Microsoft should hire that guy to do an hour chat about what the XB1 really does.

I can have 10 accounts on my XB1, but my family needs 3. With the other seven I can create accounts that I can use to loan games. I can call one Goodjer, and use it to loan games to people I know here, and just swap passwords when needed.

If you don't care about achievements, we can share a ton of games this way. So yeah, I could go PS4 and mail a disc to my brother, or go Xbox One and give him instant access from across the country.

I really want this clarified as I would love to hear more about the "family" plan. There are a few goodjers around the country I would happily share sh*tty achievement games with:) That could be an incredible selling point.

That's an interesting point. I was talking about loaning. But if you and a buddy each buy a sh*tty achievement gam, you can finish them and then swap without ever needing the disc. They said that you could give a game to someone that has been on your friends list for 30 days, but a game can only be given away once.

They also said that any "family" member can play game you own on any Xbox. I'm going to understand that to mean any of the 10 accounts you have on your Xbox. So I can have an account that named AltSallyN. You could then play a game I own using that login if I give you the password. The trick with that is, SallyNasty won't get cheevos. But if you want to check out a game, it's perfect. Or maybe you want to play off account, because you don't plan on 100%ing anyway.

Mainly, despite the restrictions, the XB1 sharing plan is a metric ton better than using discs.

If you can really share games between 10 people (both ways?) I dont understand why Microsoft hasn't spent much more time selling that feature. It would be fairly huge.

On the other hand, I don't understand how publishers would ever accept it either? Seems like it could much more effectively make an up to 90% cut in games sales, than used games could ever hope to do.
Sure, a lot of people wouldn't bother with/know about the sharing. But if it is as easy and convenient as it sounds like, over the years it certainly could caught on, especially among the more dedicated gamers.

Maybe publishers fury is the reason they aren't talking about it?

Shadout wrote:

If you can really share games between 10 people (both ways?) I dont understand why Microsoft hasn't spent much more time selling that feature. It would be fairly huge.

On the other hand, I don't understand how publishers would ever accept it either? Seems like it could much more effectively make an up to 90% cut in games sales, than used games could ever hope to do.
Sure, a lot of people wouldn't bother with/know about the sharing. But if it is as easy and convenient as it sounds like, over the years it certainly could caught on, especially among the more dedicated gamers.

Maybe publishers fury is the reason they aren't talking about it?

Not sure it's "fury", but I suspect it's something they're going to sell on eventually in the family content, but behind the scenes there's be a bit of a wink-wink going on.

What I am even thinking is that if you were able to have goodjers who know one another actually join the same "family" if it isn't locked to household. Like if DrJekl and I were to be in the same family and then we each have access to one another's games. That would be insane.

How big is game importing? From here: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/p...

Xbox One games are for activation and distribution only in specified geographic regions. See game package and/or retailer product information, for each game’s specific geographic regions.

That would seem to put a dampener on imports unless you VPN/proxy, but then your account would be in the wrong region?

The other potential issue with the alt account thing is what kind of access to your account that person gets. For example, if SallyNasty could take JayHawker's alt account, and use it to buy Sparkler Ponies XBone Ultra HD Edition, which then is proudly displayed atop JayHawker's achievement list....

The possibilities are endless.

SallyNasty wrote:

What I am even thinking is that if you were able to have goodjers who know one another actually join the same "family" if it isn't locked to household. Like if DrJekl and I were to be in the same family and then we each have access to one another's games. That would be insane.

The only drawback is that one of you would have to have your account locked to the other Xbox. I don't think they are going to let people be in two families.

But there are many times when I am finishing up on XBL when my brother in Seattle comes on. We could easily share games, even if we can't play simultaneously. It did sound like, though, that you could play on your Xbox, and one other family member could play on another Xbox at the same time.

Jayhawker wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

What I am even thinking is that if you were able to have goodjers who know one another actually join the same "family" if it isn't locked to household. Like if DrJekl and I were to be in the same family and then we each have access to one another's games. That would be insane.

The only drawback is that one of you would have to have your account locked to the other Xbox. I don't think they are going to let people be in two families.

But there are many times when I am finishing up on XBL when my brother in Seattle comes on. We could easily share games, even if we can't play simultaneously. It did sound like, though, that you could play on your Xbox, and one other family member could play on another Xbox at the same time.

Yah, presumably you would need one "head of the household" in the group, and that would be where things would get interesting and would require a great deal of trust.

TheCounselor wrote:

The other potential issue with the alt account thing is what kind of access to your account that person gets. For example, if SallyNasty could take JayHawker's alt account, and use it to buy Sparkler Ponies XBone Ultra HD Edition, which then is proudly displayed atop JayHawker's achievement list....

The possibilities are endless.

I'm going to assume I won't get tagged with my alt account achievements. But that would be pretty funny.

Shadout wrote:

If you can really share games between 10 people (both ways?) I dont understand why Microsoft hasn't spent much more time selling that feature. It would be fairly huge.

On the other hand, I don't understand how publishers would ever accept it either? Seems like it could much more effectively make an up to 90% cut in games sales, than used games could ever hope to do.

Depending on how "hot" the game is, I can't imagine a lot of people are going to want to wait to play it. With 10 people in the pool something like a BioShock isn't going to work if only person can be playing it at a time. It's also not going to impact multiplayer focused games like Call of Duty or Halo because people will want to play together, so multiple copies exist in that pool of 10 people.

It's definitely a neat idea, and something that really only can be done by switching to a license model. I'm hoping that Steam is paying attention to this as family sharing is something I think they really need to do.

Project Spark. Actually looks pretty interesting. Not sure it's something I'd mess with, but it might get the Minecraft set a new thing to tinker with.

And Smart Glass actually nearly mirrors the game?

(Is that a 7-8" Windows tablet?)

Paul Thurrott of Windows Weekly/WinSuperSite/WindowsITPro tweeted this. It was posted by a "supposed" XBox One engineer over at pastebin. Reposted before it's taken down.

note there's a few mild curses in the text (if that bothers anyone).
-------------------

>The thing is we suck at telling the story. The whole point of the DRM switch from disc based to cloud based is to kill disc swapping, scratched discs, bringing discs to friends house, trade-ins for sh*t value with nothign going back to developers, and high game costs. If you want games cheaper then 59.99, you have to limit used games somehow. Steam's model requires a limited used game model.

>The thing is, the DRM is really really similar to steam... You can login anywhere and play your games, anyone in your house can play with the family xbox. The only diff is steam you have to sign in before playing, and Xbox does it automatically at night for you (once per 24 hours)

>It's a long tail strategy, just like steam. Steam had it's growing pains at the beginning with all it's drm sh*t as well. [...] For digital downloads steam had no real competition at the time, they were competing against boxed sales. At the time people were pretty irate about steam, (on 4chan too...) It was only once they had a digital marketplace with DRM that was locked down to prevent sharing that they could do super discounted sh*t.

>Think about it, on steam you get a game for the true cost of the game, 5$-30$. On a console you have to pay for that PLUS any additional licenses for when you sell / trade / borrow / etc. If the developer / publisher can't get it on additional licenses (like steam), then they charge the first person more. [...] If we say "Hey publishers, you limit game to 39.99, we ensure every license transfer you get 10$, gamestop gets 20$" that is a decent model... Microsoft gets a license fee on first and subsequent game purchases, compared to just first now? That's a revenue increase.

>Competition is the best man, it helps drive both to new heights. See technology from the Cold War. If we had no USSR, we'd be way worse off today. TLDR: Bring it on Steam

2/4

>Yeah we passed that around the office at Xbox. Most of us were like "Well played Sony, Well played". That being said they are just riding the hype train of ZOMG THEY ARE TRYING TO frak US FOR NO REASON. Without actually thinking about how convienent it would be for the majority of the time to not find that disc your brother didn't put back... [...] just simpleminded people not seeing the bigger picture. Some PS4 viral team made them all "U TOOK R DISCS" and they hiveminded.

>Everyone and their mother complains about how gamestop fraks them on their trade ins, getting 5$ for their used games. We come in trying to find a way to take money out of gamestop, and put some in developers and get you possibly cheaper games and everyone bitches at MS. Well, if you want the @#[email protected] from Gamestop, go play PS4.

>The goal is to move to digital downloads, but Gamestop, Walmart, Target, Amazon are KIND OF frakING ENTRENCHED in the industry. They have a lot of power, and the shift has to be gradual. Long term goal is steam for consoles. [...] If you always want to stay with what you have, then keep current consoles, or a PS4. We're TRYING to move the industry forwards towards digital distribution... it'sa bumpy road

>Publishers have enourmous power. Microsoft is trying to balance between consumer delight, and publisher wishes. If we cave to far in either direction you have a non-starting product. WiiU goes too far to consumer, you have no 3rd party support to shake a stick at. PS4 is status-quo. XB1 is trying to push some things, at the expense of others. We have a vision, we'll see if it works in the coming years

>Living room transformation. We want to own the living room. Every living room TV with an XBox on input one. It's the thing that gives the signal to your TV, everything is secondary. The future, where games, TV, internet telephony, all that sh*t happens magically on some huge ass screen with hand / voice gestures... That's our goal.

3/4

>Google TV + PS4 + Minority report level gestures, that combined with a sick second screen experience (which is really hot for TV, I know I know.. tv tv tv tv tv... but it's fraking sick when you have it). Games will be the same, there are more exclusives to MS then PS atm, and Kinect 2 makes Kinect 1 look like a childs toy.

>By default it's on, listening for "Xbox On". You can turn it off tho, and turn the console like OFF off. OFF off is required for Germany / other countries that require it (no vampire appliances) [...] It has to be plugged in for the console to post. You can turn off everything it does from the settings. Think of it like airplane mode for the iPhone. You can't just unplug the cellular radio, but you can turn it off.

>Instead of 10mins, is 24hrs for your console, and 1 or 2 at a friends house. Really the majority of people have a speck of internet at least once a day. And if you don't. Don't buy an Xbox 1. Just like if you didn't have a broadband connection don't get Live, and if you don't have an HDTV the 360 isn't that great for you either. New tech, new req. This allows us to do cool sh*t when we can assume things like you have a kinect, you have internet, etc.

>Current plan is basically you're fraked after 24 hours. Yeah... I know. Kind of sucks. I believe they will probably revist the time period and / or find a diff way to "call in" to ensure you haven't sold your license to gamestop or something... but there is no plan YET. I'm hoping the change it, but I don't work on that so I don't have much influence there /sigh

>If the power goes out you ain't playing sh*t. I'm assuming you mean the internet goes out but you have power for TV and Xbox. Yes, You're fraked for single player games. Again, that's the PoR (Plan of record), but I expect it to change after the e3 clusterfrak

>What fee? There is no fee to play your games at your friends house. Never has, never will. Even x360 digital downloads could do that.

4/4

>The cloud capabilities is the sh*t they like the most. We basically made a huge cloud compute sh*t and made it free. What people are doing with it is kind of cool. THe original intention was to get all the Multiplayer servers not requiring 3rd party costs (Like EA shutting down game servers to cut costs), as well as taking all the games that servers hosted by the clients (Halo, etc), and have all that compute done in the cloud allowing more CPU cycles for gameplay. That will really expand what developers can do. Anything that doesn't need per frame calculation and can handle 100ms delays can be shifted to the cloud. That's huge.

>SmartGlass + IE is going to be pretty freaking sweet. 1 finger cursor, 2 finger direct manip. Basically if you think of a laptop trackpad where your phone/ slate is the trackpad and the monitor is your TV... it's that. The tech is there, just needs to be applied. There is some really cool sh*t going on with Petra + controllers that pairs people with controllers. So if person with controller two trades controlers with controller 1, their profiles magically switch. It's sick. What does this matter? Now if you lean left/right it knows which person is leaning, even if 4 people are all int he same room. It's awesome.

>New service using Azure for cloud compute. Allows developers to not use clients for hosting multiplayer servers, or other tasks that do not require per frame calcuations. It's pretty sweet.

>Honestly, if you care about anything other then pure games AT ALL. Xbox 1 > PS4. If all you do is play games, and nothing else, PS4.

This was all from the Microsoft engineer that was on /b/ last night.

>It's not worth my time to prove it, or risk my Job. I work in Studio A, 40th ave in Redmond, Wa. The thai place in the studio cafeteria has double punch wednesdays. Go ahead and call them and verify if you want.

--------------------
http://pastebin.com/uCmdh9jB

That's posted somewhere above from last night, or in the other Xbox thread.

SallyNasty wrote:

What I am even thinking is that if you were able to have goodjers who know one another actually join the same "family" if it isn't locked to household. Like if DrJekl and I were to be in the same family and then we each have access to one another's games. That would be insane.

Yeah, there are a few people I would gladly share games with.

Edit: That story from the engineer was new to me, and interesting. No new info, exactly, but insight into their thinking.

billybob476 wrote:

stuff

That's some hardcore skimming.

After Superstorm Sandy, our power was out for 8 days. I used my generator (after driving to PA to buy gas) to fire up the Xbox360 and play games on it. I had no internet because the lines were down all over the place.

This is not going to be possible on the Xbone.

billybob476 wrote:

Paul Thurrott of Windows Weekly/WinSuperSite/WindowsITPro tweeted this. It was posted by a "supposed" XBox One engineer over at pastebin. Reposted before it's taken down.

A lot of that reads really weirdly, especially with the "We have no problem with used games, what are you talking about?" hot potato that the publishers are passing around right now. My gut says someone isn't being wholly truthful in what they're saying publicly, if it were possible I'd like to put all the companies in a prisoner's dilemma situation and see who cracks first.

At the end of the day, they're offering certain things, and it's up to (informed) consumers to decide if they want to take them up on their offer. But really, does this...

>The thing is we suck at telling the story. The whole point of the DRM switch from disc based to cloud based is to kill disc swapping, scratched discs, bringing discs to friends house, trade-ins for sh*t value with nothign going back to developers, and high game costs. If you want games cheaper then 59.99, you have to limit used games somehow. Steam's model requires a limited used game model.

>Think about it, on steam you get a game for the true cost of the game, 5$-30$. On a console you have to pay for that PLUS any additional licenses for when you sell / trade / borrow / etc. If the developer / publisher can't get it on additional licenses (like steam), then they charge the first person more. [...] If we say "Hey publishers, you limit game to 39.99, we ensure every license transfer you get 10$, gamestop gets 20$" that is a decent model... Microsoft gets a license fee on first and subsequent game purchases, compared to just first now? That's a revenue increase.

Sound like a great thing to be buying into? To me that sounds like your car has major problems in the chassis that need major rework or replacement, and you're just patching it up with as much tape as possible to see how long you can run it for.