Jump to content
IGNORED

Xbox One Console Thread


mushashi
 Share

Recommended Posts

$500 console to the rescue!

Well, it won't be $500 forever but I take your point. But the thing which I haven't mentioned to date which I see as the pivot for whether MS can make a success of this or not is what work they have been doing with the US cable companies to get their buy-in to their product. The reality is that there is a drift in the US market towards cable cutting. That's obviously not good for cable TV companies, so there's potentially an opportunity for MS to get into bed with those companies on the basis that they can preserve some aspect of their revenues by changing their business model.

The best case scenario for MS as I see it is that the XBone replaces the cable box or is bundled with it. That way it really does become "input one" and it's under everyone's televions (here in the US) and MS finally get their way and end up with their portal in-between the consumer and the content.

The most realistic scenario is that MS fail to get the cable companies on-board because those companies can't see beyond their temporary monopoly positions and the Bone gets left as just another "guide on-top" box which ultimately fails.

But hey, I'm glad MS are trying. If they can't do it, and Google can't do it, then no-one probably can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft have been trying for a while to get their console as a payTV box in the US, they had some deal with Comcast for IPTV a while ago, not live broadcasts though.

They actually announced a recent deal with Time Warner for live IPTV on X360/X1, watch your Time Warner package directly via the Xconsoles and use Kinect to control it.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/ent-time-warner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft have been trying for a while to get their console as a payTV box in the US, they had some deal with Comcast for IPTV a while ago, not live broadcasts though.

They actually announced a recent deal with Time Warner for live IPTV on X360/X1, watch your Time Warner package directly via the Xconsoles and use Kinect to control it.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/ent-time-warner

I wasn't actually aware that this deal existed, but that does indeed look exactly like the type of change that could make a significant change to the market here. If TW start offering XBone under their subscription model this could be a huge win for MS. It works for TW too because it allows them to reach out to consumers beyond the constraints of their existing network (i.e. it starts to break the monopoly because you can offer content to anyone with an internet connection).

Apple.

Oh yeah, if they can just work out how to re-patriate all the money back to the US they can do it too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google are currently in a better position to deliver it than Apple, there are rumblings they are trying to do the deals as we speak. I don't think either of them wants to get into bed with the payTV companies like Microsoft do though, seem more interested in replacing them, even Intel are taking a punt at the payTV IPTV market.

The encumbents do have the advantage of controlling the pipes which all the companies who want to eat their lunch have to rely on, the whole tripleplay idea, even Vodafone, a bloody gigantic mobile phone company, think overpaying for cable TV companies is a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google are currently in a better position to deliver it than Apple, there are rumblings they are trying to do the deals as we speak.

The same Google that has struggled to get any decent media deals into the Play store? (Particularly world wide.) And the same Apple with a great track record of getting music, film, and TV content into the iTunes Store, and the same Apple that did more than anyone else to move the entire music industry to digital distribution?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

im frankly amazed that Apple have dragged their heals so much in regards to a TV Box. Apple TV is useful (if you have iPhones etc), but deliberately crippled for no good reason - and just crying out for its own app store.

its like they can't actually be bothered with the hassle. If MS were cheap and had good apps - they may stand half a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that Apple have actually being working behind the scenes for ages, but getting agreement from all the content providers is tricky. It's not a matter of just chucking TV shows on it. The networks are quite protective and there are many hoops to jump through to convince them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Media streaming ones. iPlayer, Sky Player, 4od, LoveFilm, etc.

You probably wouldn't need an App Store* for them, though. I mean, you only need one Lovefilm app, surely; the whole point of the iOS/android app store** is the combination of an enormously versatile screen and the portable nature of the phone, allowing you to have all sorts of useful apps. With a static TV and much more limited input, I'm not sure a TV app store would be as important.

*it distresses me that my phone automatically capitalised this.

** I was ready for it this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a reason why none of those players are available on Apple TV? I just assumed it was some licensing bollocks that Apple weren't prepared to get into.

I'd love nothing more than a box the size of an Apple TV, with such a simple interface, that also connects to all my Apple devices, that plays everything I want.

Sorry if this is the wrong thread for this kind of talk, but the last few posts resonated with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way streaming apps get on the Apple TV right now is when Apple bake it into the core OS, presumably with some sort of commercial agreement behind it. That's OK for the big hitters with global reach like Netflix, but it doesn't scale to half-a-dozen smaller players in each of scores of countries.

Hence, there's nothing UK specific at the moment. Even though all of those players (or very nearly all of them) have iOS apps, of course, which suggests they would certainly like to be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

errr. i dunno lets start with games, media apps etc etc. all in a device thats less than a £100.

There's no game controller. I don't really see why people thinks it's a particularly desirable move for Apple to have an appstore on the TV. They're pushing phones and tablets which use touch screen controls and seem to be doing quite well out of it. A very different direction to TV based consoles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

errr. i dunno lets start with games, media apps etc etc. all in a device thats less than a £100.

I think there’s a couple of reasons why games wouldn’t work. The first is what JP says above, in that how would you control games? With a remote? At best, the games you could have on there would be pretty limited – Puzzle Bobble would be about the most complex thing you could do.

I guess Apple could bundle in a controller, but then you run into the other reason – if you’re playing games with a controller on a big TV in your living room, then you’re competing against Uncharted and Call of Duty. There are loads of brilliant games on iOS and Android, but a lot of them are stuff like Angry Birds and Temple Run, where you’ve got a relatively simple game that you play on the toilet or while waiting for a bus. Not many people would want to play Jetpack Joyride on a 42” plasma when you could play it on your phone. iOS games are generally more something you play while your wife or boyfriend are watching ‘The Returned’ on the main TV, rather than something you devote a couple of hours of your evening to. You get stuff like Real Racing, but I don’t really see people buying an AppleTV to play Real Racing; you’d buy a PS3 or an Xbox and GT5/Forza if you wanted to play that kind of game on a big TV, surely?

With games, Apple would either have to beef up their set top box massively and compete with Nintendo and Microsoft and Sony, or try somehow to convince people of the merits of playing iOS games on a massive screen. Neither seems particularly likely, or desirable from Apple’s perspective.

I don’t really see the appeal of other types of app as well. There’d be no point in accessing Wikipedia, or eBay or Amazon on a TV; ditto Twitter or Facebook (despite my TV and Xbox having these apps already – why would you choose to check Facebook this way?). I guess you could have a Spotify app to listen to music through your TV, but again, why use a TV for this? There just isn’t the potential in TV apps, short of a few things like Lovefilm and iPlayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an Android TV box that I use for xbmc and iPlayer etc.. It has vanilla Android 4.0 on it, and therefore the regular store.

Android has gamepad support over USB or Bluetooth, meaning my box doubles up as a retro emulator box :) there are even apps that let you map pad controls to those native Android games that use the overlaid controller input method.

I even have a remote desktop app that I can use to stream games from my PC. Only really works with slower-paced games like Civ etc, (i have a wireless track pad & keypad thingy) but still!

But, i do see what K and JP are saying, to an extent. sure, a load of phone/tablet designed apps are not going to be practical on a TV. But that doesn't mean a TV couldn't utilise an app store.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of apps would work on a TV, though? Serious question. Streaming stuff maybe, but again, surely you would just have the official apps for each service? Once the official Netflix app is on there, where's the incentive for anyone else to develop another one?

I think the apple app store succeeded because of a versatile device and an untapped market for online shopping apps, maps, train timetables, twitter, Skype, etc. I don't see why you'd want to do any of that on a TV - it'd be less convenient than doing it on a phone. I seriously doubt many people would want to browse Amazon or eBay on their TVs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that MS are going to have to do a Sony this gen - overcome hardware shortfallings by upping their services and software game.

Worked out really well for Sony - PSPlus, and a cleaner design methodology for Vita and PS4.

The big advantage MS have here is that they have to bring their A-game with regard to software - and software is what they do. They're primarily a software house, where Sony are primarily a hardware house. There's a strong chance that they could get some very exciting things done.

The truth is that Sony have a lot more 1st and 2nd party devs than MS, and arguably stronger/more varied games. In addition to that they are making all the right noises where the indie devs are concerned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The truth is that Sony have a lot more 1st and 2nd party devs than MS, and arguably stronger/more varied games. In addition to that they are making all the right noises where the indie devs are concerned.

Yup, Microsoft mentioned 15 exclusives within the first year and Sony are looking at 30 (actually, 20 of those in the first year). I think only a quarter of the in house developers at Sony have announced their new projects. I remember hearing something about their 13 studios working on titles and we still don't know what most of them are. Sony Santa Monica are working on a new game and one of the writers of Battlestar Galactica has been working on it for over 2 and a half years.

The writer said he had been working on the game for the last two-and-a-half years, but it may still be some time before the game is complete. Santa Monica's 150-strong development team only began working on the project in full force after wrapping up God of War: Ascension earlier this year.

Angeli refused to give more details about the unannounced project but confirmed it was not a new God of War title.

Our Worldwide Studios team has more than 30 PS4 exclusive titles in development, 20 of which will launch during the first year of PS4.

I really do think that Sony have the advantage with exclusives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could be that MS shot their bolt at E3, knowing they just had to show games, and now have nothing left in reserve. Sony on the other hand, who were arguably weaker in terms of E3 exclusive games spectacle, have always intimated that they have a lot more to show.

Still too early to discount the MS claim of $1 billion investment in Bone games development though. I'm sure they haven't shown a billion dollars worth of games yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quantity doesn't mean wide appeal though, Sony have punted out more home grown exclusives than Microsoft this generation, yet haven't managed to close the gap in the key US/UK markets, where Microsoft's fewer home grown exclusives do best. On the evidence so far, that ain't changing anytime soon.

The former head of Xbox, Robbie Bach, spelled it out way back when, they don't deem it necessary to change a winning formula obviously:

http://archive.videogamesdaily.com/features/robbiebach_videointerview_july05.asp

Our approach to first party content, just in general, as an overall philosophy, has evolved over the last two or three years. We've gone from being a well called "bulk" producer of first party games to being somebody who focuses on titles that drive the platform. That means we're going to do fewer titles, it means at times we're going to want those titles to be carefully timed with new things we're doing on the platform.

...

Our first party studios will do fewer games, that's a true statement. They will be bigger titles, more focused, more AAA-generating titles than we've done in the past. Our third party publishing community is doing such a great job of covering the sort of the spectrum of platforms and the spectrum of genres for things that we don't need first party to be able to cover every single genre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They aren't necessarily better, but for most publishers, they are the #1 and #2 markets to make their money, Japan maybe #2 globally, but for EA,et al, it might aswell be #99.

And it's because of their success in those 2 key markets that Microsoft beat Nintendo last gen globally, and are even with Sony this generation, despite being behind in most other markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.