***WARNING: THIS IS NOT A CONSOLE WAR THREAD. PLEASE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IT IS. THIS IS MERELY AN OPINION THAT YOU CAN OR CANNOT AGREE WITH. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE.***

We sit here now knowing more information about our future in gaming. Microsoft and Sony have tipped their hands to give us a look at what their plans are, and the two could not be on further ends of the spectrum.

I've sided with Microsoft over the course of this last generation for a number of reasons:

• The overall stability and feature set of Xbox Live
• The Microsoft exclusives (Banjo-Kazooie, Halo, Alan Wake, and a handful of others)
• I liked their controller a hell of a lot more
• Xbox Live Marketplace and its plethora of fantastic downloadable titles
• It's the console that we chose to carry in our gaming center (meaning I didn't have to buy a console)

Nothing that Sony had offered with the PlayStation 3 tickled my fancy. Well, there's that and the fact that Dark Cloud 3 was never announced. Personal issue aside, PlayStation 3 seemed like a high-price Blu-Ray player, and I'm more of a digital content type of guy. After they were hacked, things drastically improved for the PlayStation 3 and I began to see the console that I wanted Sony to make this whole time.

Now that we've seen what Sony and Microsoft are both offering, it would seem that Sony learned from their own hubris and mistakes...and they fully have plans to fix those and get right with gamers again. Meanwhile, after the Xbox One reveal conference today, I have this deep down feeling that Microsoft doesn't understand the depth of the mistakes they are about to make.

From here on out, we will be talking about some things that are merely rumors, some things that are confirmed kinda but not really because something or another things but they are basically confirmed, and things that are definitely confirmed.

The first problem that Microsoft has deals with their approach to "always on." Phil Harrison stated in an interview (that has since been kinda-sorta debunked by Microsoft support but Harrison keeps pushing that it's correct information) that you will need to turn on your Xbox with an internet connection enabled to it at least once every 24 hours. This sounds like a lame duck "authentication" DRM attempt. Either have it one way or the other, but don't middle of the road this shit on us. If you want an always online DRM, then make it require an internet connection at all times. If not, then don't include the function at all and move on.

However, the deeper problem with this comes from the potential of alienating audience. What happens if I have my internet shut off for a couple of months because I decided that my internet bill money could go somewhere more worthwhile? As it stands, internet is a LUXURY, not a NECESSITY. Hell, what happens if I forget to do this "turn it on once every 24 hours" thing for three days because I'm on vacation? What kind of punishment will I face? An Xbox Live ban? A fee that I have to pay in order to re-authenticate everything? Nothing at all? It's a very bad thing to leave people guessing about potential punishments due to one of your silly policies like this.

The second problem deals with their general approach at this press conference. Yes, we get why you are calling it Xbox One. It all has to do with your "new age" metaphoric bullshit need to say "it's the one box for everything." You said the same shit about the Xbox 360 also, and by all means, I'm not going to be the one that tries to deny Microsoft completing that mission fully. Show of hands how many people had a console doing their movie streaming, game playing, social media aspects, and multiple other services? However, this press conference did nothing but assure people "hey, we're going to offer television, streaming, television, sports, television, Call of Duty, exclusive television series, sports, Call of Duty, television." Included is a compilation that highlights these points:

See the problem here? Sony focused on the thing that matters to gamers: the games. They gave us some talk about the system itself, but they made sure to point out "hey, you like games, so do we, let's play some fucking games." The deeper problem, Microsoft, is that your focus was on everything BUT games. Yes, I'm aware that you are talking about games at E3, but as part of your initial reveal, showing more than a Call of Duty trailer would mean a lot. Right now, the information and buzz out there is not good. You've shot yourself in the foot.

Third, we'll talk about the "used games/borrowed games" rumors. You are going to make us...pay a fee...equivalent to the full price cost of the game itself...to play it on another profile? You are fucking high. You literally puffed on some incredible shit and have gone batshit-lost-your-fucking-mind. Yes, I know that the used game industry (places like Gamestop) can hurt the bottom line of some publishers, but honestly, we do not exist in the same time as we used to. Back in the day of the PS2, there wasn't a downloadable game space. You didn't hear all the whining about used games then. Why? That is due to this generation having a strong presence of downloadable titles right at our dashboards costing $10 or $15 which could equate to the same level of value that a full $60 game could present. Because of things like this (as well as economic issues in the United States), $60 is a steep asking price. People are looking for values. Here's a better solution: publishers work with places like Gamestop, garner licensing deals for selling those used games. This would means the publisher is still making some money overall, and it could possibly keep a couple of studios alive. I'd like to think that Bizarre Creations would still be alive if this were the case.

Instead, you wish to alienate more of your audience. If you are going to charge the same price as a full copy of the game, why not just buy the full copy of the game? Okay, that's the point. We get it. However, why not just stay on PC? Hell, it costs about the same amount plus about $100 to build a PC that will run all the third party shit you offer on your box, run all the same services that will be on your box, literally do EVERYTHING your box does outside of exclusive titles. However, I can buy my games at literally FRACTIONS of the price. My new copy of Bioshock Infinite was $35. My new copy of Dishonored? $30. My downloadable games? Wait until they go on sale and pick up Mark of the Ninja/Deadlight/Iron Brigade/Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet/Toy Soldiers for $10. Not only will I have the game available to me whether I'm online or off (in most cases), but I can also plug in YOUR controller and play them...with better graphics...better frame rates...and generally better experiences.

Is this going to stop piracy? No. If anything, it will promote people sharing their Xbox Live profile email and password, allowing anyone to download the profile and play whatever games they want. You are exchanging one way of trading for another. The only issue is that you will now be pushing people towards compromising their secret information, which could lead to security issues on the user's end as well as your own. It's a downhill idea, and nothing short of "dump this used game policy crap completely" is going to make it easier on you.

A deeper problem that you face? You got accidentally lucky with the Xbox 360. There weren't tablets, smartphones, and primitive mobile gaming devices at the time. In this day and age, why do I need your box to watch television, to search the internet, or to play downloadable games? We have a myriad of devices at our disposal to take care of their wants. What makes your console special? It has to be the games, and right now, you've shown nothing. That could change at E3, but unless some of these policies change, I doubt that will happen.

Let's address a patent that you offered back in November for the Kinect, something you didn't offer a lot of focus on. First off, the fact that you HAVE to have the Kinect attached to your system for it to work is silly. However, when looking at that patent, we can start to understand why. The idea that there are companies who use your browser cookies in order to direct advertising to you is already a little creepy. However, the idea that your company is going to be spying on how many people are sitting in my room while we watch a program on your box? Are you seriously out of your fucking mind?! Do you think that will actually fly? I say this while living in a country that allows cameras on top of street lights and street corners, etc. Maybe people won't have an issue with that, but many of us do! If there are too many people, you will prompt me to pay more money? How about we just unplug your box and throw it in the trash instead?

The mainstream of casual gamers out there may not realize what you are doing at the moment, but we do: you are just hooking a PC up to a TV. That's what consoles have always been: underpowered PCs. However, the parity at this point is really hard to not correlate. The issue is that you are creating a highly restricted PC.

As it stands, Microsoft is fumbling into this generation...HARD. Hopefully E3 can reveal stuff that changes my mind, but as it stands, Microsoft...you really fucked the pooch on this one.

Thank you all for reading, and please, share your thoughts in as civil of a manner as possible.

The mocap dog stuff was the highlight of all that for me.

I didn't even get into how it looks like an old school NES fucked a VCR and created the most "out of an '80s movie box" that I've ever seen. Whatever. That's neither here nor there...but there is nothing about that box that makes me say "OH HELL YEAH!"

To be fair, they have indicated multiple times today that they -do- have a solution for working with retail to allow for some kind of used games market. And we supposedly should know more by E3. So, I imagine there's more to the story than we may think. Retailers still want to be selling games, and however they're doing their permissions, apparently retailers will still have plenty of incentive to sell both new and used games. What that means is still up the air(similar to Sony's unclear used games policy), but I highly doubt there will be no market for used games with the X1.

Ben Kuchera apparently got wind of some more bad news. Microsoft is continuing their "no self-publishing" policy, which basically means that indies unable to secure deals with publishers for their games are stone-cold out of luck and won't be able to publish their games on XBLA.

It's history repeating itself in reverse. Sony was on top of the world after PS and PS2 and got cocky with the PS3, thought they could do whatever they wanted and they paid for it. Now, Microsoft came out as kings of the generation and they're getting cocky with this new console.

Isn't life awesome? Nothing is ever certain.

Oh, wow. I never even thought of the implications of the Kinect camera's abilities until you mentioned them. If it really can and will be used in such a sordid way...well, that's a little messed up to me. Of course, I'm a little paranoid about things like that.

I've never owned a Microsoft console, and don't plan to, but I like to follow the news out of an academic interest. Also, it's nothing against Microsoft, I just starting playing games on a PlayStation, and stuck with it. I really don't know that much about all the technical differences between systems, but I'm hoping that a new console generation will really reinvigorate video games. Maybe I'm not looking in the right places, but it's been a long time since I've felt excitement about a game. There's a sense of fun and play that feels like it's been missing for a while. I know that this reveal wasn't intended to focus on games, and that it won't be until E3 that the meat of the content will be shown, but so far, the Xbox One just doesn't look...fun.

I'm considering purchasing a 3DS with the hopes that some of the games on there (especially the new Animal Crossing) will scratch that itch. But best not to rush things.

That seems like the least of their issues right now. I imagine that it's probably horribly expensive to become a licensed publisher for Xbox if you're a small indie dev but that option still exists. Best thing that indies could do is form a co-op publisher for their games if XBLA is still worthwhile.

Well said @jakob187, I think you nailed it.

This is a bigger problem than you might think. Sony is going to allow self-publishing on the PS4, and Nintendo already allows it on the Wii U. Between forcing online, and forcing kinect, and not allowing loans, or trades, or rentals, and now continuing to block self-publishing, Microsoft are just being absolute control freaks at this point.

This is also the reason why I'm STILL waiting for an update to Pinball Arcade, and still waiting to play new tables that gamers on every other platform have been playing for over half a year now. The developer's 360 publisher went bankrupt, and MS won't allow them to publish the DLC themselves. That developer is not some small indie operation, they're making loads of money with the game on every other platform, and Microsoft still refuses to allow them to even publish UPDATES to their damn game.

That's just pathetic.

I understand the depth of the problem and the really dumb scenarios that it's created but I think that if there's a single Xbox exec who is thinking about their 'downloadables' publishing policies right now instead of dedicating every thought process to fixing the perception of their product between now and launch then they need to prioritize.

I think that I can understand why Microsoft doesn't want to allow self-publishing on the Xbox and I suspect that it's mostly about covering their own asses in instances of rights-related disputes, content issues, reliable delivery and also probably about the fringe benefit that a lot of good indie games ended up at Microsoft Game Studios thanks in part to this policy.

As I said in my previous post, my 'ideal' solution to this problem would be getting some of the more successful and prominent independent studios and developers together to form a boutique publisher focused on funding and digitally distributing "small" games. It seems kind of crazy to me that it hasn't been tried yet even though digital storefronts seem to be doing okay at the moment and crowdfunding is kind of viable. I guess the logistics and the financial risk must be pretty horrifying but I don't think that those problems go away as you decrease in scale, I suspect that having scores of indie devs aiming to self-publish would probably result in some spectacular failures too.

It seems to me that Microsoft realizes the 360 is a piece of garbage compared to the PS3 when it comes to being an entertainment center and rather than improving on those areas while also continuing with awesome video game stuff, they have retooled their focus into making it JUST an entertainment center. I get it, E3 is in a few weeks. They'd better show us some games, how the Xbox One actually works with those games and does new things(They hinted at a reworked achievement system that is no longer just do x, get y points but something more dynamic), how the Kinect and controller integrate into these game experiences, and they are going to have to do a heck of a lot to impress me because the Playstation 4 is doing EVERYTHING I want a new console to do.

I'm the sort of guy who hasn't had time to play games lately and while I'm looking forward to getting back into gaming, I'm confused what avenue to go down. I have more of an emotional attachment towards Xbox, but what Xbox represents is unrecognizable to me now. I'm pissed that all of the licenses I've purchased on XBLA and Xbox On Demand aren't transferring to the new console. I understand that the architecture is different, but I've built a library. It's as ridiculous as wiping a users iTunes collection every time they get a new computer.

I'm leaning towards PS4, but the PS3 hacked really annoyed me and I'm tired of installing games. I'd need to be assured that the software's better.

I'd consider PC gaming, but I'm a Mac user and there aren't enough games for the platform. Yes, I can install Windows for now, but what does Steam's future look like? Valve hates Windows 8. Linux maybe?

I don't know why this has to be so complicated. I just want to be able to buy games and know I'll be able to play them ten years from now.

I am wondering right now if the AMD custom hardware in the PS4 means its easier for developers to make PC <-> PS4 games.

Yes he did, this is why I recently built a new gaming computer, ever since "Durango" info leaked I had a bad feeling about Microsoft screwing things up and I hoped I'd be wrong, After today other than what's left of 360 exclusives I'm done with Xbox. That said the PS4 seems more appealing at this point but I'm in "wait and see mode" with that. It's really sad as I loved my 360.

Dog. There was a dog. And he was mocaped.

Not since Nintendo's early stuff has a console been touted as an "Entertainment System" as much as during that unveiling. I don't even know who that new gamer is they're talking about that apparently rarely play games.

When customizing your character in Call of Duty is the best thing at an unveiling, there's something terribly wrong (and I'm not saying that to diss CoD:Ghost, I am sure I'll play that multiplayer like a crazy person).

MoCap Dog is coming to PS4 as well isn't he? Just that X1 is getting the new mutliplayer maps releases first.

I'm surprised that there hasn't been anyone saying anything contrary yet.

Some of the most interesting advances in games have been from the indie side. By taking that "no self publishing" stance Microsoft is basically letting "The Next Minecraft" appear on another platform. It is the same thing that happened last gen but now it is pretty much guaranteed.

@slag: Nope the dog IS the DLC the PS4 version get's a giant talking cat instead.

@wampa1: Deal. Breaker.

Me too. You kinda hit the nail on the head though.

I think that is more damning about Microsoft's positions than anything. I haven't seen much resistance at all to attacks on Microsoft in the last two days, maybe two or three dudes, and all they can really say is "Wait till E3".

Call me paranoid but their unveil of the new kinect was not exciting, it was creepy. So my xbox is designed to be on 24/7 with a camera that has facial recognition and voice recognition? Microsoft needs to come out very clearly about their policies regarding the collection of user's data, how it is stored and under what circumstances it is shared. I used to work at a law firm specializing in litigation and I know from experience that it is very easy to subpoena a company like Microsoft for their business records regarding customers.

Knowing only what I know today about xbox 1, I can't say I would play on one even if it was given to me for free.

@jakob187 I agree with most of what you're saying, good post! I think Microsoft, in their eternal confidence in themselves and their ability to read what the world wants, has bitten off too much "of the cake" this time around. I neither want nor need my console to be the "ONE" thing taking over all my multimedia needs, from browsing the web to movies/series, communication, music and lastly games (huh). The idea of controlling the interface with my hands doing silly gestures, having it voice-controlled and all this stuff that DOESN'T at all contribute to the ONE thing I want my console to do well - gaming - is just fluff which detracts in my opinion. I don't know if I'm alone in this, but I really just want a controller - I do not want to wave my hands or talk to the damn box. It's just annoying.

Why can't a console just be a hub for everything gaming related, and do THAT job alone really, really well anymore? This is exactly what the PS4 sounds like it's going to be - at least that sounds like the main focus. Sure it can play movies and music, if you want that, but if you plop a PS4 under your television it's mainly because you want to play games with it. And really, this simple message is refreshing.

Microsoft wants this new xbox to be the same revolution for our livingrooms that the iphone was for the cellphone market, and I just can't see it happening. They want everyone aboard, sailing over-confidently on a huge wave of cockiness from the current generation that they won, and in the process I think they are losing grasp of what people really buy consoles for...

Lastly, and this is more a comment from someone living outside of the US: The Xbox One seems REALLY tailored to the US market with all the voice commands and TV integration. I don't want to talk to my console at all, let alone in english which isn't my native language... No, give me a basic controller, some awesome next-gen games and I'll be more than happy.

@kohe321: I'm not going to say that having something be the primary focus for everything isn't nice...but that's what my PC is for. When I buy a console, I'm buying it for a handful of things:

1. To play games alone or with friends
2. To get the exclusives that will only be available on that console
3. To use for my other forms of physical media (CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, SD card, etc)

Beyond that, if it can stream some stuff to me like Netflix, fine. However, I don't own cable...and I never will. Hell, has Microsoft even CONSIDERED that will have Hulu Plus and Netflix on this thing? If people subscribe to just those two things, have an internet browser available to them, and then pay for internet, they can completely cut the cable and use a digital antenna box for their local channels!

What's more boggling to me is their positioning with the name. The Xbox One is supposed to be the box that will take care of everything for me, right?

So I can play my 360 games on it? Well, no.

What about my XBLM games? No, not those either.

Okay, so you mean to tell me that your strategy was to be the one box for everything in your living room...and yet you aren't even supporting the games from the previous console, thus meaning we need a separate box in the entertainment center?!

Everything about this console, Microsoft's strategy, and the policies just sounds like a guy trying to laid on prom night when the girl doesn't want anything to do with it. "Just the tip, come on, I just wanna get the tip in...I don't wanna fuck you, just the tip."

Half-in on the always-on strategy...half-in on the used games shit...half-in on the digital media...half-in on being "the one box to rule them all..."

It's just annoying. I liked the 360 a lot, and it's really fucking annoying to see these guys do the same shit that made Sony flounder in the first three years with the PlayStation 3.

In turn, it just means that I'll be sticking to PC, and at some point, I might get a PlayStation 4 once a good handful of exclusives are available (or until there are at least two Disgaea games on the console, so that shouldn't be long).

Jim sterling made a great point: The XBONE is asking to much: subscription + High speed internet + restrictive policies: people that can afford such things most likely already have a device or the budget to have a device that is way better (Gaming PC, iPad, Smart TV, Samsung tablet whatever .. you name it )

Its an elitist approach detach from reality, and detached from its core audience.

Reading through this post, one thing alone came to mind. Gaming for a long time has been a lot bigger than this somewhat bullshit notion of "us" that comes to video game websites every day and stays informed. We are important early adopters and taste makers in this regard and we play an equally important role in turning the cultural wheels but from a console and market perspective we are increasingly less relevant as the console business moves toward wider and wider audience share.

Thinking about what they focused on, who was this presentation meant for? A general audience that responds exactly to the things they showed: TV, Call of Duty, streaming, and sports. They're the ones who Microsoft hopes and assumes will buy this thing in a wide enough market share to justify the costs of producing a dedicated box that can do multi-media, online stuff, AND play the latest vidja-games. Out of the few competitors in this market, they are the ones most directly going after the general audience that will likely turn them back a profit on this weird video game venture they began since 2000.

As for the used market, I have to wonder if the cost of losing a few customers will justify the revenue gained from the program. At least that's what their cost-benefit analysis should be telling them to go through with the idea. I wonder though how many people are actually invested in used versus using it as a convenience in place of, say, cheaper regular pricing for games on consoles. Either way, if the math works out, then those that are okay with it will stay and everyone else will adjust and move on to alternatives. The only scenario we need to worry about is if both console manufacturers go with the idea, games stay prohibitively expensive, and the courts do nothing/support the idea. In that case the low-end consumer market for games and the overall confidence in the market will drop in an already tight market and video games will be hit by some real financial woes. Of course, none of these companies are beholden to shit if it means losing them money, so who's to say what will happen.

In the end though, I think it's downright foolish to discuss any of these online features like they are set in stone if only based on how MS has been internally inconsistent with the messaging. If their internal messaging isn't consistent and simple, then chances are there will be plenty of confusion come launch day unless they clean up or simplify the message. From a marketing standpoint in terms of controlling the message, one could argue Microsoft is doing a poor job plugging all the holes in the dam.

EDIT: One final thing, I wonder what this will mean for the 360, its boxed games, and the state of its Xbox Live.

The forced inclusion of Kinect isn't getting as many complaints as I'd expect. That's a big extra monetary cost upfront for something that a lot (most?) people have literally zero interest in and the obligation of setting this thing up in your living room with its camera and microphone just sucks. I'm not paranoid about privacy, but like you I do find it redundant and creepy and I don't want it.

@bacongames: I have no problem with them targeting other audiences. If they want to offer external services beyond just "hey, play some games," let them. They did it with the 360, and yet that console still has a strong focus on games, both retail and downloadable. Mind you, a lot of that is hidden behind advertising, but it's the driving force of the platform.

However, when you make all of that stuff get in the way of being a gaming console, let alone in such a restrictive manner, it makes me as a consumer who wagered on your console last go-around say "the PS4 and PC are looking much much MUCH sweeter." I also understand that they are doing games at E3, which is a nice thing for once. Nonetheless, that does not mean that the games will make me think less about all of this other stuff that they have presented.

As for the internal messaging, I think a lot of this is stuff that is generally half-assed junk where TOO much thought was put into it all. Moreover, I have a feeling that Microsoft needs to learn to commit to an idea. If they want to go always-on, then go always-on. I don't want to deal with the maintenance of turning it on once every 24 hours, especially since no one has any information on what exactly happens if you DON'T turn it on that intermittently. I already deal with the maintenance of owning a PC, so why would I want even more from another box? If they want to prohibit used games, then prohibit them completely. Don't say "well, you can pay a fee, and that fee is the full price of the game." It defeats the purpose already, so just say "no used games, no borrowed games, everything is licensed." Hell, I would go so far as to say that they should offer to publishers/developers an option to go DRM-free with their games if they'd like instead of REQUIRING a license. Also, don't shut out the indie developers that made your last console so goddamn successful. Disallowing the ability to self-publish has its benefits on a business end, sure. It means that the complaints of "a patch costs this much to put out" won't occur as often, but it also means you are going to lose a LOT of business to Sony.

Everything about their strategy right now is half-assed bordering on rotten.

@jakob187: I somewhat agree with you if it works out that they were unsuccessful in both market share and gamer mind-share but until E3 and probably years into the console itself we won't know the answer to that question.

Hell man, Steam's lookin' pretty good from where I'm sitting and if Sony is willing to budge for me, I might throw them a bone too. Based purely on what we know now (which could easily change come E3 and launch day), that's looking like a lot of people's plans around these parts.

Having given it some thought since the announcement, I think, if MS is truly sincere about this all-in-one console ideology, they haven't gone nearly far enough in that direction. I would probably be interested in something that actually does that. What you're talking about when you bring up that concept, from my perspective, is a thing that functions as a replacement for both my gaming consoles and my PC. The PC is my current all in one work and entertainment device for everything except games. Only reason I own consoles is unified system specs, control input, and knowledge that I will not (should not) have any trouble getting a game I bought from a store to work on my corresponding console.

This is precisely why I have supported Valve's interest in possibly putting out a dedicated home system for Steam. What I would like in that regard is a functioning PC with standardized parts, with standardized upgrades put out every year or two specifically for Steam-console units. Say, Steam partners with nvidia or something to put out a line of standardized plug and play video and memory upgrade cards. For Steam to partner with game developers to put out games that must work with most recent Steam-console baseline system reqs.

Naturally I am well aware of the mammoth complications involved in putting together something like that. I'm just saying, Microsoft, that if you want to sell me an all-in-one thingy, that's the sort of thing I could be persuaded to buy. Streaming movies and gimmicky tv related interactivity slapped on top of an otherwise gaming dedicated box comes far short of my expectations for 'all-in-one'.

Well said. The "Reveal" was for all those people who watch Netflix on their xbox when you pull up your friends list. MS has the data, it knows what portion of the owners do what and for how long. So this presentation was for non-gamers. E3 will be for gamers. I just hope MS can keep both these groups happy, cause gamers certainly are huffin and puffin for now.

I agree with pretty much everything you've said.

@firebirdinf said:

I'm sure, given the corporate masters and others that have to be pleased, the Xbox team is feeling it right now and they should. Their messaging, as Vinny said, was very "press release" with nothing concrete and now after the fact, contradictory and confusing. For better or worse, Sony had a clarity of message with their box within the bounds of their presentation and deserve the marketing victory for that. The question is with this gamble on who they're marketing to with these press reveals, who will matter most. I'm sure financially MS is betting on the wider audience but maybe in this tighter market, the consumer confidence coming from people like us going more toward PS4 (only under what we know so far) might be decisive.

If you sit down and think about it though, this is a calculated risk on Microsoft's behalf because they have to know that everything they did was going to get a negative reaction from the "hardcore" set. But they got their message out there, and people across the US and world repeated those buzzwords: TV, Call of Duty, etc. that will hopefully get through. Will all this hot blood, I cannot fucking wait until E3. Haven't had a proper fight about this video game thing in a long time.

Did we honestly expect anything different coming into this conference? We knew they were going to eschew the hardcore gamer in favor of the general public. The hardcore gaming crowd right now can't be too excited about this system, especially with its blatantly anti-consumer policies. Many Blu-Ray players can do a lot of what the Xbox One is offering, maybe not at the same level of flash but in many ways similar, and at a lower price. I'm sure the Xbox One will have a few exclusives that sell it well, but their lack of focus on the hardcore gamer doesn't make me optimistic about the extended life cycle we'll likely face with this system. Sure, they'll support it well at launch, but how about 3 years from now? Will they instead focus on the multimedia capabilities of the system at that point?

The PS4 is looking much more attractive. Games, games, and more games is their fundamental goal coming into this generation, and I can't say I'm not excited for that system.

I'll be damned if that isn't one of the best quotes I've ever quoted on this website. You, sir, deserve a goddamn Pulitzer for that wording, imagery, and downright pure logical thinking.

I also cannot wait until E3. We haven't seen blood in a while from these guys. It's been nothing but bitchfighting for this generation with Nintendo wiped the floor with them. This is going to get REALLY interesting really fast.

@bacongames: @jakob187:

yeah now I've settled down a bit, I think you've got a point bacongames. If Xbox wanted to capture the attention of the TV watching set, they had to go after them first and establish the TV capabilities narrative. That seems to have worked as USA Today, Fox News, Cnn etc are all buzzing about the Xbox1. Gamers were already going to watch regardless and will still watch E3 for the games.

I predict a gamer split between the Bro Sports/CallofDuty crowd (XBone) and the nerds/Japanohiles (PS4). It's going to be on like Donkey Kong at E3.

So brave.

So much of what they are doing is showing that Microsoft either has no idea that the status quo has been shifting the last few years or is willfully trying to go against the current.

Nobody liked Kinect, despite strong sales there has never been an appropriate amount of praise to match. Indies have become huge. Individually they all might not pull in Minecraft numbers but combined they are quickly pulling attention away from AAA games. By putting a Great Wall of China sized barrier to entry in front of them is almost as if to say your not worthy.

The only people will be picking up a new console right away are tech savy and gamer oriented people. The Joe gamer Madden and Call of Duty player is not going to buy a system at launch, they never have never will. Microsoft's hard alienating push towards them makes no sense. These tech savy people who will buy the Xbox One are the same group who are cutting ties with their cable providers and watching Netflix and Hulu or buying stuff a la carte off Amazon. A ridiculous grab at live television seems actively ignorant at the cord cutting trend that 360 along with PS3 really played a huge role in.

And to be honest I love Call of Duty, personally though BO2 was the best in the series so far. That being said dedicating 10% of your console reveal to CoD seems crazy. Call of Duty already hit its peak and is now on the decline. And frankly is the butt of too many jokes to count these days. Using them as a crutch when you could have shown a half dozen more games in the time given to them to show only seconds of real gameplay shows just how out of touch they are.

@jakob187: As much as I would hate to admit it, not because I'm a MS or Xbox Fan but because competition is always good, but everything you said is dead on.

That would be devastating to indies on the xbox platform.

Microsoft doesn't know what they're doing - what a surprise. They've essentially phoned-in the last 3-4 E3's, and have had barely any exclusives for at least 2 years. It's not a shock they got greedy.