Xbox One: Microsoft's All-In-One Home Entertainment System
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Last semester several Comcast reps gave my class a presentation which included a summary of their media strategy, a demo of their new cable TV platform/cable box, and a Q&A section. Their new cable box (a small, black, ATV-like 'dumb' set-top box) is progressive: it has a modern UI, connects to the Xfinity cloud platform, and can be updated through software rather than hardware changes.
However, one student asked their VP of Media Acquisition a simple question: "Who is your biggest competitor?" His answer shocked us.
"Microsoft."
At the time (~March), he told us Comcast expected Microsoft to stage a coup to claim "input A," the consumer's primary content interface. Traditionally, consumers would have their cable boxes plugged into input A and their gaming consoles plugged into input B. Microsoft, he said, would attempt to take over input A by including a cable jack in the back of the Xbox and offering live TV alongside streaming/web browsing/apps/games.
Looks like he was spot on.
This presentation just feels... empty.
It's largely middle-aged men (and a woman who worked at tv companies) dryly reciting a badly written script with significant intentional pauses intended for applause after non-funny jokes.
The opening demo was kind of interesting. It's hard to tell if the tv/kinnect interactivity was staged or not, but it seems real enough to be impressive. More of this please.
Followed by a guy that no one knows or cares about, speaking at length the hardware, about how revolutionary the new product is. He doesn't actully say anything much about how the new system is built beyond "5 billion transistors and 8gb of RAM!", while briefly flashing some tech specs floating next to an amorphous blob of 3d Xbox parts.
Then we get to see a non-MS exec from EA introduce a 2 minute interview with some sports guys....
SHOW THE DAMNED GAME!!
Look, when you're showing off your product SHOW IT OFF. Don't put your fatty bag of mostly water in between the product and the people trying to learn about it.
Then the stream died for me after the CBS/Time Warner lady started talking. I caught the end where guy #1 is talking about Stephen Spielberg and Halo, the it died again.
For the HN audience, there's a ton of lessons to take from today. Talk about the product, don't get in the way, and make sure your tech supporting the launch works and is stable. Everything else will take care of itself.
I also had far less criticism than you did for the presentation, I found it similar to what Sony and Nintendo do on stage and definitely par the course for a console release.
I mean, think about it: Sony hasn't even shown off it's hardware yet, and they announced months ago. Now Sony is telling us they'll actually, you know, SHOW US the console in a few more weeks. What gives?
At least Microsoft put the product there, front of stage, and (presumably) ran a few demos on it.
Your bar is too low. Expect more from product releases. Was this launch better than the PS4 launch? Absolutely. Was it great, not at all.
I will never introduce a product that doesn't do what its being sold to do until I can stand in front of 100 people and show it working.
It certainly wasn't without flaw, but it did get me somewhat excited about a console I didn't really have any interest in before the event.
And while they definitely spent time on the typical shooters and racers, they made a point of spending time on games more off the beaten path, as well.
http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/20/4347614/microsoft-reveals-i...
That being said, there was almost no hardware talk today. I know there's some good hardware and engineering in that black slanty box. That's all I've heard hinted about for months, about how impressed we'd be with the hardware, etc. Next to nothing was said about it.
Most people I know who own an Xbox consider it essentially a Netflix player.
These people bought games, but they don't really play them.
I've got naught but my anecdata, but I think attempting to bill this new console as an entertainment system that happens to also play some great games is a very, very good idea.
I own a 360 but I don't use it anymore.
The only thing they said is that Xbox Live will continue to be based around the subscription you have now. So, Xbox Live will still cost $50/year. What services require Xbox Live on the Xbox One is not announced yet but based on the 360 the answer is probably almost everything.
The 360 was the first console to offer Netflix and they had exclusivity for a while so they could do it. Once the exclusivity ended they didn't make it free because they felt no need to because lots of people continued to pay up.
http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/consoles/bbc-we-d-still...
Alternately, I'd love to be able to put Linux on that box and make it a MythTV box. Sadly, my cable provider locks all their channels. For better or worse, MS are one of the few that could create a set top box that legally decrypts all these channels and has a great UI.
my bet is they are going to make use of [1] HDMI-CEC.
But why would they pay hundreds of dollars more for a "new" Netflix machine? And if they own none of them, and just want a Netflix machine, why not buy a much better (for media) $100 Roku? Or even an Apple TV?
I bought both of those consoles when they were new and collected a bunch of $60 games that I "don't really play". For several years now, the vast majority of gaming I do comes via games bought for a steep discount to console prices on Steam.
I stopped buying DVD/BDs when I realized how few of them I'd actually watch repeatedly. These days, a single $4 stream of a new release on Amazon is the norm.
I think it says something that a person like myself, who could previously be counted on to buy each new generation of console is unmoved by Xbox One.
At the same time, I expect the more mainstream customer might be just fine playing games and watching movies on the smartphone/tablet they almost surely already own.
I don't think this is a bad idea, but I do think it might be too late.
Maybe you just got old? It takes a lot to get me to play a video game these days.
Oh, I definitely did, in a way that's the point.
The product appears to be aimed at my changed tastes, it's just arriving late.
I've been a diehard Xbox fan since I first got my hands on the original, but this makes me want to switch back to Playstation.
I already knew the new xbox would be the next gaming console. It seems like they went for the non-obvious, and wanted to talk about the other features. The games are going to be the draw for gamers, and I'm sure those will be just fine.
from what i've seen this appears to match the ps4 in every way - even down to the architecture. the only difference is they glossed-over all that and decided to focus on the ways its differentiated..
also, this issue is nothing new and is certainty not unique to microsoft or the xbox. i think its fairly well understood that there's going to be a change in this area as the way content is distributed continues to evolve..
whatever the actual implementation is, i'm pretty sure it wont be as bad as you're implying (... removed the ability to buy, sell, and lend games) and will probably be standard across the industry - and structured in a manner as not to totally decimate the second-hand market..
[1] http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/21/4348916/xbox-used-games
I'm a diehard PC fan though so I probably won't get a console anyways
Not exactly gamer friendly.
Just because I like Madden, I'm a "bro gamer" now? Get over yourself.
I don't play FPS games, but I know smart and sensitive people who do. They don't pretend it's not a badly justified gorefest though, just like smart people who listen to Manowar don't.
A lot of people are very let down by games that get reviews just gushing over the plot and the atmosphere and puzzles but end up being 90% gore and FPS (like Bioshock for example).
The point you're making is essentially that people that might enjoy popular franchises or particular genres of games aren't "real gamers" but a lower, subclass of gamers.
The point I'm making is that just because someone enjoys playing Madden (or football) does not mean that they don't also enjoy smaller, independent games ('yeah, most people have never heard of it'). We can be "gamers" too you know...
Microsoft's job, as far as the Xbox, is the following... 1) Go lobby for components from various manufactures to meet the next-gen specs (whatever that may be) 2) Create tools and APIs for developers to understand the platform for which they are building 3) Improve existing services so that gamers have a consistent and enhanced experience
Its a lot of work, but its no rocket science either. Every console does this. Which goes to my point... When it comes to the games, these consoles are basically the same thing (especially the ps4 and xboxOne). Sure, some platforms may have an exclusive here and a different game there. Overall, the ps4 and the xboxOne will be matching one-for-one the basic gameplay mechanics.
What Microsoft did was say "alright, lets not focus on the redundant, but lets take a look at what separates this console from the other one (ps4)".
This is just an unveiling of what the console is. Don't worry, the games are still here. They will always be here. They could've made a presentation with nothing but demos. Sure, gamers would be delighted. But, if you think of it, it doesn't make sense to do so. Especially that E3 will be coming in only a couple of weeks. There will be plenty of games there.
My limited circle of friends who game have moved back to PC gaming and given up on consoles. We all own them, but they became glorified Netflix boxes. That was until MS decided to charge $59.99 a year for Xbox Live. Then we all bought Roku devices instead.
I used to rave about the old Blades interface and how, OMG, Microsoft made a great user experience, and how weird it was for me to feel so strongly positive about a Microsoft consumer product. So of course they destroyed everything about that interface that was so great.
When Steam put Big Picture mode in beta, I knew I was done with consoles. I got a cube-shaped PC case that was big enough for a full-size video card, put said video card with a nice Ivy Bridge i5 CPU in it, and my consoles got the permanent shut-down.
I think Valve would crush the console scene if they actually had anything to show for the hype.
Everything I saw about the "Steam Box" suggested to me that it would be an underpowered machine for more casual games.
But the great part about Steam is that I could build my own damn hardware and use Steam and Big Picture Mode on it. So now I have a legitimate mid-range gaming PC hooked up to my TV and launching Big Picture on startup.
As a Linux user and lover, the idea of an eventual Steam box running on Linux is an exciting idea, but in the meantime, I'm running my own box on Windows.
Seems like the real next gen gaming console will be i5 with low profile 7950 shoved in HTPC enclosure.
I want to play some games for fun. But seems we will be getting enhanced online multiplayer socially enabled jump controlled experiences instead.
That should say a lot.
Other than that I never look at the thing except to put a disc in. Who cares what the box looks like. You're going to be looking at your TV SCREEN the whole time.
"Who cares what the box looks like." I'll just leave the Limp Bizkit stickers on it then.
EDIT: Looks like they use Windows 8, but the Windows 8 apps will need to be modified to work on Xbox. From Engadget:
In terms of whether apps will be cross-compatible between the regular Windows Store and the storefront accessed by the new console, we're told they won't. Developers will have to do a bit of work to make a Windows app suitable for the Xbox, not least in terms of tuning their UI for Kinect or the wireless controller. But Microsoft's engineers told us that the underlying similarity between Windows 8/RT and Windows for the Xbox should make this a pretty easy feat for coders. [ Ref: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/21/xbox-one-runs-three-opera... ]
> 1080p camera... 60 FPS. Field of view increased by 60%....
> motion tracking... detect skin pigmentation changes related to heart rate
In soviet russia, home entertainment system watches YOU!Seriously, imagine being able to measure consumers' emotional reaction to your advertisements... if you were worried about information being gathered about you, with google adwords targeting you by search, or facebook data-mining your social network, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Compared to the PS4's continuation of Sony's "games first" philosophy and Nintendo's "we're sorry core gamers!" philosophy with the Wii U (that's not working out so hot right now, given how lukewarm core game developers are to it), it may be a risk that pans out for Microsoft, but it's a bit unfortunate: gaming—and not just sports gaming—has made gains into mainstream culture over the past decade, and it doesn't seem like it really needed to be brushed aside in order to "win" this generation's console war.
I haven't used an optical disc for a movie since.
I used the original XboX, then transitioned to 360, then to PS3 - now my PS3 does what all of my previous xboxes did.
But....the truth is, with the 360, I was so blown away by how easy it was to connect to all my MSFT networked devices that I would gladly give this new xbox a chance to rock my world again.
MSFT has really gotten XboX right. Every. Single. Time.
I hope they don't try to lock down this one - where you can't play 'pirated content' and they have some hardware DRM or some bullshit like that.
That's the only reason I will wait until others try it out.
If it doesn't allow me to watch the content I want to watch - then I won't get it.
If I can......I just may.
Then again...my current PS3 is already pretty awesome so I may not need to.
I too have the Logitech Revue and it eventually just became a netflix box for my kids. We just switched back to having a dedicated laptop for our TV and never looked back.
I own a PS3, Xbox 360 and a gaming PC. The 360 came first and combined with Xbox Live it became my default gaming device. Probably 60% of my games are for my Xbox 360. After a few years with my 360 I bought a PS3 because there were some exclusive games I wanted to play. In 2010 Battlefield 3 came out and I built a gaming PC for it because in my opinion the Battlefield series excels when played with a keyboard, mouse and servers that can accommodate large scale battles.
A strange side affect of building that gaming PC was that I started buying games for my PC instead of my consoles because the games looked and played better on my PC then my consoles.
This next console generation is going to be the most homogenous yet. Developers will be able to make a game that works on PC, Xbox One and PS4 so easily that brand loyalty will mean a lot less.
Unless Microsoft actually releases some TV features that actually work outside of the United States I don't know if I'll be buying one of these new consoles. I'll probably continue buying games for my PC until a platform exclusive game (which are becoming increasingly rare) comes out.
Developer effort hasn't been the limiting factor in the current gen either. Exclusivity is all about politics/marketing. And I don't see any signs of that changing.
So the reason to buy a next-gen gaming console would be the same as for the previous: games.
My consoles always work (no red ring on my 306 yet, knock on wood) and the new games always play great. I'm almost definitely getting one of the Microsoft or Sony next-gen consoles. I would definitely consider a steambox as well, as I love the idea of a living room game PC... Though I'm not sure how I'm supposed to manage the wireless keyboard and mouse while sitting on my couch.
I'll be getting a PS4. I read that you can't even play used games on the XBox One.
This is a killer app and a genius acquisition by Microsoft. Having so many young, tech users using Skype is going to have a massive flow on effect to other users in particular older ones.
Can't watch Xfinity on the Roku or ATV, can't watch Netflix or unfiltered Youtube on ATV (can't get any VEVO content on the ATV), can't rent Amazon movies (prime is OK on 360) on 360 or ATV, and can't serve music from multiple computers to 360 or Roku.
We can flip that around and say that no one device gives us all of the entertainment (and gaming options) that work best for us. I like to play a few games here and there, so there should be some console. I haven't even bothered to bring in the cable box (it actually only got plugged in long enough to authorize us for XFinity) because I've run out of HDMI ports (there's a blue-ray player in there too, because I'm sure as heck not going to pay Hulu for their buggy service just so we can stream the Criterion Movies, when most are on DVD/BD)...
I like the concepts that MSFT is showing off here. I haven't reviewed the remote music service from MSFT in a while, but last time it lacked the simplicity of the ATV, especially for multiple libraries. If they've got that improved, the ATV is gone. (Having no other real value to us.) If they'd remove the restriction from paying to rent videos on Amazon, the Roku would be gone too. My partner uses all of these devices for her entertainment, and would happily switch to just an Xbox 1 if it does the job well. I'd be happy to have to maintain fewer devices (each with their own problems, let's not get down that path!).
I'm not sure about the source of much of the angst here, but it does sound just about exactly what our household has been looking for.
I'm officially old because I do not find this interesting at all. My son will want it, so we will have it, but as a person who buys a lot of tech, I am not seeing the appeal.
I think it is the all-in-one, do-everything approach it Microsoft is taking with this that disinterests me. Why does every company want to be your everything now a days?
Everything about operating a TV today is pure pain. The centerpiece here is an obtuse, 100-button remote that no one fully knows how to use. You use this remote to get at the "mode switcher", which changes you from TV watching mode, to bluray watching mode, to gaming mode, to whatever else you do with your TV.
It's painful, not to mention a lot of people have receivers to handle the audio portion of this. It's like a really, really bad KVM.
The only way to eliminate that pain was to take over all of the above responsibilities, and MS just did that. With any luck this means you will basically never have to touch your TV's god-awful remote ever again, and the terms "Video 1", "Video 2", and "TV" will cease to have any meaning.
Power on, wait, skip special offers from Microsoft, no I don't want to update the console today, click to make anti-virus warnings go away, okay, now I can pick whether I want to play games or watch TV, TV, live TV or internet, internet, now pick the Netflix channel, and start watching! Hurray!
Yeah, that's so much better than picking "Video 2" and using the Netflix box.
Nor has Microsoft or Sony ever held up anything so you can watch a special offer. This is just FUD.
Go watch the keynote, they cover all of this. They're betting on voice control lowering the "depth" of the UI. Instead of "TV -> live TV -> Sy Fy -> Star Trek" it's just "go watch Star Trek", ditto for on-demand, ditto for sports, ditto for games even. Everything they showed today indicates single-action-to-final-destination.
Sadly we're witnessing the second vg crash. No more hardcore gamers, no more preowned games...
It seems that if we want to have a REAL GAMING EXPERIENCE, (this includes fun, creativity, good stories, simple controls) we will need to go back to the past.
Fortunately, 'retrogaming scene' will gather more adepts. =)
If you want more interesting games there's no shortage of stuff from indie developers or even AAA devs who are not EA and co. Including almost ridiculous numbers of "new retro" games. That market hasn't shrunk (if anything it's larger) it's just now a smaller proportional piece of an overall larger pie.
Plus if you wait for Steam sales you can get games so cheap (often 50%+ off) that you don't really need preowned games.
A bit painful, considering that my ISP just announced to upgrade my connection from 120/10 MBit/s to 150/15. The bandwidth is there, but I guess it's hard to make licensing arrangements.
I disagree. They managed to partner with the NFL but yet not show any games. Most of the games for my favorite team I still can't watch. Seems really lame to me.
Basically like the old joke "How can you tell if someone is an atheist? Don't worry, he'll tell you."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5744967
It was up at #3 then went to the second page,strange.