Xbox One

I like XO because it reminds me of a Playstation controller :D
 
trunk_slamchest said:
its laziness and poor decision making on Microsoft/Sony's part.
Click to expand...
People harp on about backwards compatibility but really very few people actually use it. The Xbox 360 was only backwards compatible for some games and the PS3 only had proper backwards compatibility in the first release US and JP versions but every other iteration of the console sold fine without being able to play PS2 games. It would be ridiculous to waste effort and money trying to work in backwards compatibility or keeping to an old architecture instead of moving forward instead of just dropping a feature few people use. Once again you are completely and ridiculously overestimating how many people care about a feature that you do.

BTW when I've been calling it an X1 and TBH when I saw XO first I thought it was supposed to be a clever way of writing "360" because a circle is 360 degrees. For the moment I'm using: XB -> 360 -> X1.
 
ríomhaire said:
People harp on about backwards compatibility but really very few people actually use it. The Xbox 360 was only backwards compatible for some games and the PS3 only had proper backwards compatibility in the first release US and JP versions but every other iteration of the console sold fine without being able to play PS2 games. It would be ridiculous to waste effort and money trying to work in backwards compatibility or keeping to an old architecture instead of moving forward instead of just dropping a feature few people use. Once again you are completely and ridiculously overestimating how many people care about a feature that you do..
Click to expand...

as i outline below,if microsoft/sony went with a x64 Dual Core Xeon, Dual Core Pentium D/EE HT or even a x86 Core2Duo for the 360/PS3, there would be absolutely no issues of backwards compatibility because all 360/PS3 games would be native with windows8 and the XO/PS4.

that is why i spout laziness/poor desicion making. this generation of consoles + the next generation of consoles was never factored into the development of the 360/PS3.

or it was and this has been their plan all along, a reality that will piss alot of people off if it is true. either way, they are royally screwing their consumer base on a level never thought possible.

Bad^Hat said:
I was following your post up until this part, how do you mean? Like, in terms of piracy? I felt like it was a good move in terms of development since it'd be much easier on third party developers, especially compared to the PS3, and also make porting to other platforms more straight-forward.

Edit: Or wait, do you mean x86 as opposed to 64?
Click to expand...

hypothetically, if sony/microsoft went with the PowerPC in 2005 to keep their console's hardware/software environments separate from the architecture PC's were built off of (x86/x64) in order to combat software piracy, it worked in most ways. mostly because of the lengths people had to go through to mod their xbox to play pirated games. but there are no 360 emulators for the PC. there are no pirated 360 games that came to the PC...ever. because of the 360/PS3's architecture. id say that is very effective. there are some pirated SDK's 360 floating around the internet, but thats it.

but the hardware setup caused hell for developers on both consoles. the custom chips developed for the 360/PS3 were modified PPE tri core processors from IBM. the Wii U uses a PowerPC tri-core microprocessor that is a predecessor to the tri core xenon the 360 used. we all know the Wii U is not the fastest bullet in the gun. that tells you how weak the PowerPC CPU family is.

i like to imagine if microsoft/sony went with a x64 Dual Core Xeon, Dual Core Pentium D/EE HT or even a x86 Core2Duo for the 360/PS3. everything would be so much better right now because there would be absolutely no issues of backwards compatibility. all 360/PS3 games would be native with windows8 and the XO/PS4


but flast forward to this generation of consoles.

now with the XO/PS4 sharing the same x86 architecture as PC's, microsoft's new fantastic way to combat piracy is just a barrage of shit. the hard install of all games, mandatory kinect attachment, mandatory one day internet connection, no self publishing of indie games, 2nd hand game fees, no backwards compatibility, no XBL games on XO, watermarked discs, f2p games, and a handful of other things i cant remember off the top of my head. all they are doing is over compensating.

little do they realize that the only leverage they had over pirates has now been erased. the over compensating they are doing by having their consoles run on the same architecture as PCs in order to make it easier for developers while adding a massive amount of security measures...will not float. regardless of whatever checks safes that they put in place, the tallest hurdle that Microsoft/Sony put in the face of pirates was the different architectures.

that is now gone. its like the old term, you cant compare apples to oranges. well, microsoft and sony just magically changed their apples into apples and they are going rotten.

pirates cant change the hardware, but they can reverse engineer the software and re distribute it. just like SimCity.

EDIT: sorry for the lengthy post, its just frustrating to watch the entire industry become rudderless.
 
trunk_slamchest said:
microsoft and sony just magically changed their apples into apples and they are going rotten.
Click to expand...

Masterfully clever sir.

The rest of your post is all fine and dandy, but again, not many people care about or use backwards compatibility. So their decision to use different architecture in the 360/ps3 makes a fair amount of sense in effort to curb rampant piracy. The decision to revert back to standard architecture also makes sense since the burden on developers was bigger than anticipated (but not so big that it prevented Gabe Newell from reversing his hate-stance on the PS3). I agree that the anti-piracy measures being taken with the One are abysmal though, but right now there is no good way to handle piracy, so no matter what they do we will hate it.
 
trunk_slamchest said:
that is why i spout laziness/poor desicion making. this generation of consoles + the next generation of consoles was never factored into the development of the 360/PS3.

or it was and this has been their plan all along, a reality that will piss alot of people off if it is true. either way, they are royally screwing their consumer base on a level never thought possible.
Click to expand...
If only they had the ability to be able to view decisions made in almost a decade ago with hindsight of a random internet user of the future.

"royally screwing their consumer base on a level never thought possible." is a ****ing ridiculous statement. Most people don't even replay games. They don't care about backwards compatibility. They buy the sequel and the previous game either sits on a shelf and gathers dust or gets traded in. The SNES and Mega Drive weren't backwards compatible, the N64 wasn't backwards compatible, the GameCube wasn't backwards compatible, the Xbox 360 wasn't properly backwards compatible and the updated versions of the Wii and PS3 (and any version of the PS3 released in Europe) weren't backwards compatible and next to no one gave a shit.

The rest of your post is a bunch of random hypothesising and doom-saying that has little to do with anything. The more of your posts I read the more I'm convinced that this is you:

6Ogrtqv.jpg
 
I thought the 360's CPU was chosen because it's cheaper to produce a CPU that only handles in-order execution rather than out-of-order execution, which is what modern PC processors do? Plus you can hardly say the WiiU is slow "because of PowerPC architecture" when it's clocked at least 50% slower than the 360.
 
ríomhaire said:
If only they had the ability to be able to view decisions made in almost a decade ago with hindsight of a random internet user of the future.

"royally screwing their consumer base on a level never thought possible." is a ****ing ridiculous statement. Most people don't even replay games. They don't care about backwards compatibility. They buy the sequel and the previous game either sits on a shelf and gathers dust or gets traded in. The SNES and Mega Drive weren't backwards compatible, the N64 wasn't backwards compatible, the GameCube wasn't backwards compatible, the Xbox 360 wasn't properly backwards compatible and the updated versions of the Wii and PS3 (and any version of the PS3 released in Europe) weren't backwards compatible and next to no one gave a shit.

The rest of your post is a bunch of random hypothesising and doom-saying that has little to do with anything. The more of your posts I read the more I'm convinced that this is you:
Click to expand...

where is sega now? the gamecube was overshadowed by the PS2, xbox and dreamcast for numerous reasons and im pretty sure the PS2 sold extremely well at launch because it was backwards compatible and people already had a built in library of games from the PS1 and didnt have to wait for exclusives to be released. sony even acknowledges this and is allowing PS3 games to be streamed on the PS4. do you realize the Mega Drive was natively backwards compatible? all you had to do was buy the "Mega Adapter." the wii was also backwards compatible, which is probably a reason why it sold so well. i bet if nintendo added a peripheral that made the SNES backwards compatible, as well as the N64; the dreamcast would have never existed and nintendo wouldnt be loosing money year over year. again thats me speculating.

no one cared about backwards compatibility in previous generations because SHIT WASNT THAT EXPENSIVE in comparison to this generation of consoles. the genesis sold at launch for $189, SNES @ $200, gamecube @ $200. the n64 @ $200. the PS2 sold for $300 at launch and was backwards compatible. games were $30-50. there were no in game stores or online subscriptions. there were 4-5 consoles on the market at all times until sega died, so prices had to stay low. consoles had to be cheap in order for kids to convince their parents to buy it for them. when it used to cost a fraction of what it does now in order to upgrade to next gen hardware, upgrading wasnt a big deal. now a days youre spending $500-600 on a console, $60-70 per game, $10 a month for XBL, and who knows how much extra $$ on ingame items and microsoft points. there was no global recession. expendable income was at it's highest in the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's. no one had to care because they could buy the next best thing without having to worry about it.

your point of people just buying the sequel and the previous game either collects dust or gets traded in speaks of the younger generation of casual gamers that arent spending their own money on the games they buy. that point is also bullshit because i, for one, love playing old school PC games on Dosbox or Virtualbox. i get very angry when i try to play a game on my PC that was released pre-winXP because that means it wont work with windows7 and i either need to Virtualbox/DOSbox it, or hunt it down on GOG and pay extra for a game i already own. its infuriating especially when win98 and win7 are essentially built off the same kernel.

it is because microsoft wants me to pay more money for the same product, even if they no longer support it.

system shock 2 is legendary for being unplayable on win7, and only recently did GOG port it. its the same reason people are infuriated with microsoft dropping windowsXP support and forcing people to upgrade to win7/win8. especially when ~50% of the windows user base is on winXP. if you were around for the DOS/windows 3.0 days you would know why backwards compatibility is important.

obviously, if the choice is removed, no one will care. but i dont expect you to understand where im coming from, so dont worry. i appreciate the fact you want to prove me wrong, but you, much like krynn, vegeta and babyheadcrab, miss where i say "if" and "hypothetically," meaning do not take my posts as fact because i am merely speculating. you should browse through the rest of my posts on valvetime. you, much like krynn, vegeta, and babyheadcrab, will find them very amusing.

Stigmata said:
I thought the 360's CPU was chosen because it's cheaper to produce a CPU that only handles in-order execution rather than out-of-order execution, which is what modern PC processors do? Plus you can hardly say the WiiU is slow "because of PowerPC architecture" when it's clocked at least 50% slower than the 360.
Click to expand...

so if nintendo parks the Wii U at 1.24 ghz, that is not slow? they obviously parked it for a reason...

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/20..._wii_u_system_update_has_boosted_clock_speeds

this would mean the 360 and the Wii U are essentially running the same processor. there is a reason the PowerPC's never took off, and IBM relinquished the line to its server products and corporate divisions.

idk if it was cheaper to be produced, but with the way Apple, IBM, Motorola were pushing the PowerPC in the 90's in order to compete with intel, i couldnt tell you. but i do know that the POWER6/Xenon were among a select few within in the PowerPC family that didnt run OoE. the P6 family of C2D's and C2Q's were OoE at first, but intel abandoned OoE due to heating issues, and were delayed until july 06 to be released.

ill be honest, you might be right with cost being a factor, but i dont buy that the PowerPC was outmatching P6 family chipsets of the era because i remember buying an 8800GTX, and a C2D 6600 instead of a PS3/360 in late 06 and laughing at how it was outpacing current gen consoles.

EDIT: again, sorry for the long posts...but that thing about the industry being rudderless...
 
I was just staring in awe at your massive post and then I noticed my name. Can't be arsed to read the rest of it to understand the context. I'll just pretend it's something good, which it must be since me and krynn are grouped together.
 
trunk_slamchest said:
where is sega now? the gamecube was overshadowed by the PS2, xbox and dreamcast for numerous reasons and im pretty sure the PS2 sold extremely well at launch because it was backwards compatible and people already had a built in library of games from the PS1 and didnt have to wait for exclusives to be released. sony even acknowledges this and is allowing PS3 games to be streamed on the PS4. do you realize the Mega Drive was natively backwards compatible? all you had to do was buy the "Mega Adapter." the wii was also backwards compatible, which is probably a reason why it sold so well. i bet if nintendo added a peripheral that made the SNES backwards compatible, as well as the N64; the dreamcast would have never existed and nintendo wouldnt be loosing money year over year. again thats me speculating.
Click to expand...

You really think the Wii being backwards compatible to the Gamecube accounted for a significant amount of its sales when the Gamecube itself was "overshadowed" by the other consoles of its generation? The Wii U is backwards compatible to the Wii (so much so you can even use the same peripherals), which was the highest selling console of the last generation. Doesn't seem to be doing it any favours.

I don't really disagree with anything else you're saying, and I get the value of being able to play older games since it's something I enjoy too, but I think you're speculating pretty heavily when it comes to how much this actually affects sales figures. There's probably a decent amount of people who value backwards compatibility and factor it into their console choice, which might have some effect on early sales, but I doubt there's very many to whom it's a deal breaker. In other words, they'll still buy the thing when the price is right.
 
Vegeta897 said:
I was just staring in awe at your massive post and then I noticed my name. Can't be arsed to read the rest of it to understand the context. I'll just pretend it's something good, which it must be since me and krynn are grouped together.
Click to expand...

I kind of skipped over the wallpost out of desire to not get caught up in a whole 'nother thing, but if he mentions me by name well I now I have to read it!

trunk_slamchest said:
i appreciate the fact you want to prove me wrong, but you, much like krynn, vegeta and babyheadcrab, miss where i say "if" and "hypothetically," meaning do not take my posts as fact because i am merely speculating.
Click to expand...
The problem is that you "just speculate" in the same way Glenn Beck was "just asking questions."

God I hope you get that reference, I really don't want to explain it.
 
Krynn72 said:
I kind of skipped over the wallpost out of desire to not get caught up in a whole 'nother thing, but if he mentions me by name well I now I have to read it!


The problem is that you "just speculate" in the same way Glenn Beck was "just asking questions."

God I hope you get that reference, I really don't want to explain it.
Click to expand...


not really because i dont assume what i am spouting as fact, nor do i impose my beliefs on other people, nor do i try to convince other people to believe what i am saying, nor do i insult people for disagreeing with me, nor do i have a talk radio show that has paid call-ins. im not accusing anyone of anything, im not even asking questions of anyone. i am just speaking my mind. i do my best not to insult anyone, and if someone offers a view point or perspective that is more logical or reasonable than my own, im the first to admit it.

glenn beck cant admit hes wrong or understand faults in his own logic. him and rush limbaugh make wayne brady look like malcom x
 
Backwards compatibility is simply to expensive now to implement. To cost of adding the main 360 components cost way to much to be worth doing. Sony found this with the PS3 it cost to much for nothing in return. What you will see now is company's forcing you to re buy the old classics again. Look at the PS2 classics on the PS3, all PS3's are now backwards compatible as they all have a PS2 emulator. Interesting fact being that the old PS3 will full backwards compatibility will use the emulator instead of the original PS2 processor for the PS2 classics. And all you are doing is buying a 1:1 encrypted image of the game. Sony could have easily let you put a PS2 disk game in and let the emulator check for compatibility then let you play the disk copy but they won't cause they want you to pay for the privilege. Same with the Vita originally the plan was to be able to hook up your PSP with the the retail game and get a major discount for it on PSN for the Vita, but it was scrapped because Sony found people will pay full price for old classics when they have no other choice. 360 games will come to the XBO in some way and they will be expensive.
 
I'm not going to bother with most of what you said but:

trunk_slamchest said:
no one cared about backwards compatibility in previous generations because SHIT WASNT THAT EXPENSIVE in comparison to this generation of consoles. the genesis sold at launch for $189, SNES @ $200, gamecube @ $200. the n64 @ $200. the PS2 sold for $300 at launch and was backwards compatible. games were $30-50. there were no in game stores or online subscriptions. there were 4-5 consoles on the market at all times until sega died, so prices had to stay low. consoles had to be cheap in order for kids to convince their parents to buy it for them. when it used to cost a fraction of what it does now in order to upgrade to next gen hardware, upgrading wasnt a big deal. now a days youre spending $500-600 on a console, $60-70 per game, $10 a month for XBL, and who knows how much extra $$ on ingame items and microsoft points. there was no global recession. expendable income was at it's highest in the 80's, 90's, and early 2000's. no one had to care because they could buy the next best thing without having to worry about it.
Click to expand...

Inflation does exist you know. $200 in 1991 is not $200 now. I'm no expert on the matter but Google finds an inflation calculator here that I'll assume is accurate. At year of release the figure's you've given translate to:

Genesis: $189 -> $354.42
SNES: $200 -> $341.46
GameCube: $200 -> $262.75
N64: $200 -> $296.41
PS2: $300 -> $405.11

games: $30-50

In 1989 a $50 NES game is $93.76 in today's money. A 1995 SNES game worth $50 at launch is $76.29 in today's money. Games staying $50 at launch meant that games were getting cheaper and cheaper every year. The increase of price for AAA games hasn't even kept up with inflation. A new copy of The Legend of Zelda at launch cost more than a new copy of Resident Evil 6 did last year.
 
PimpinPenguin said:
360 games will come to the XBO in some way and they will be expensive.
Click to expand...

http://asia.gamespot.com/features/x...l-spencer-talks-used-games-always-on-6408725/

Phil Spencer said:
I think the [Xbox 360] is going to be very vibrant for many years. In fact, we have a huge, I think it's huge, [Xbox 360] announcement for E3 that I keep wanting to talk about, but I can't. I think it will surprise people. I loved what we did with Minecraft; bring Minecraft to the box; six million units later it's kind of a beast. I think there's a lot of life in the [Xbox 360] for years to come
Click to expand...

youre right.

ríomhaire said:
Inflation does exist you know. $200 in 1991 is not $200 now. I'm no expert on the matter but Google finds an inflation calculator here that I'll assume is accurate. At year of release the figure's you've given translate to:

Genesis: $189 -> $354.42
SNES: $200 -> $341.46
GameCube: $200 -> $262.75
N64: $200 -> $296.41
PS2: $300 -> $405.11

games: $30-50

In 1989 a $50 NES game is $93.76 in today's money. A 1995 SNES game worth $50 at launch is $76.29 in today's money. Games staying $50 at launch meant that games were getting cheaper and cheaper every year. The increase of price for AAA games hasn't even kept up with inflation. A new copy of The Legend of Zelda at launch cost more than a new copy of Resident Evil 6 did last year.
Click to expand...

games are not staying at $50 at launch...they are $60 and above on consoles. all those numbers you posted are still under the $500-$600 minimum that youre going to have to spend on a next gen console today. regardless of inflation, my point still stands.

applying a generic inflation rule to video game companies and the products they sell does not work. none of these companies have anything to do with REAL global inflation, and the only way they are effected by inflation is that their consumer base has less to spend on their products or that a corporations plant in China has to be shut down. we are talking about consumer electronics here....not maze or petroleum...things we as humans actually need.

that means video game companies are inflating the cost of their own products because they are spending more and more and more on marketing and development costs and other R&D that the end user does not benefit from, as well as the "AAA video game development pipeline" which is not sustainable.

with digital distribution and cloud gaming becoming main stream, the cost for games to be supplied by distributors is cut to nothing. yet console games are still ~$60? i dont buy that. valve doesnt seem to be having a problem, or feel the need to keep their games at a constant $50 due to inflation. valve isnt jacking up the price of their games and services...they are making cheaper and cheaper a la COMMODORE; which is forcing microsoft and sony to restructure the way games are distributed on their consoles because valve is winning.

youre also completely ignoring the point i made of how expendable income was a factor. if we as consumers had more money to spend in the 80's and 90's than we do in 2013, inflation doesnt hit our pockets as deeply, does it? it is kind of a wash, isnt it? games in 1989 were not developed and distributed the way they are now. it cost $40 million to develop HL2. that is ridiculous regardless of what valve spent the money on. i cant imagine what the R&D costs for HL3 are if it is actually being developed. yet i am 75% sure HL3 will be f2p. Metro Last Light was developed with 1/3 of the budget of its competitors. we all know indie games cost less to develop and thus cost less to be sold.

it is fake inflation if anything. if we were talking food, oil, gas, raw material inflation then yea, i wouldnt be making this argument.

but video games are art. they are not a service. they do not regularly inflate and deflate with the world's economy like raw materials do.

the only way for the price of video games to inflate is because the artist who is creating it demands it.

the best games i have ever played were mods. mods dont have multi-million dollar budgets. yet the content they provide is usually better than what corperations can produce. look at torchlight 2 and its steam workshop support.

you should be questioning the reason for inflation within the video game industry, not accepting it as an inevitability.

a more accurate description of my ramblings is better depicted here (use your imagination):

EDIT: i like my posts like i like my mullets. business in the front, party in the back.
 
trunk_slamchest said:
but video games are art. they are not a service. they do not regularly inflate and deflate with the world's economy like raw materials do.

the only way for the price of video games to inflate is because the artist who is creating it demands it.

the best games i have ever played were mods. mods dont have multi-million dollar budgets. yet the content they provide is usually better than what corperations can produce. look at torchlight 2 and its steam workshop support.

you should be questioning the reason for inflation within the video game industry, not accepting it as an inevitability.
Click to expand...
I agree with this in principle, but ultimately the production of art is tightly tied with inflation and the value of physical goods. Artists are a limited commodity whose artistic talents need to be paid for, because they need to pay for physical goods to sustain their existence. If they're not making a living wage (or more, depending on how much value they place on their work-as-art), their services will be bought by a competitor with more money. It can take a while because of the lagging response in these kinds of long chains of cause and effect, but eventually the price of basic goods like food and housing drive the costs of the creation of work-intensive art, which ultimately drives the cost of games. Art exists on its own, but without the artist surviving to make it and make more of it, where can it come from? Granted, the trope of the "starving artist" exists for a reason, but the number of artists willing to subject themselves to years of poverty for the sake of art is miniscule in comparison to those who recognise the monetary value of their work and put at least a token effort into getting market-fair compensation for it.

For every Torchlight, there is a Diablo. For every Fez and Castle Crashers and Counter-Strike, there is a Call of Duty, an Uncharted, and a Dragon Age.

I fully agree that some of the greatest games ever made were mods, but you can't forget that the framework for those mods was built on for-profit products inexorably connected to inflation.
 
im not doubting that the underlying framework that mods and games run off of is important. goldsrc is essentially a mod. ill hopefully be co developing a modular game engine in the near future that works with an IDE to make game develop easy to do for the average user; but atm we are still laying down the tracks so to speak.

well now we are getting into commercial artists and fine artists. i live in nyc so i see alot of what youre talking about in terms of starving artists and the hipster crowd out of brooklyn; the type of artist that uses the self inflicted hardships to inspire their work. i am a graphic designer by trade so i know what youre talking about with what youre outlining in terms of cost efficiency and profit, as it is what i deal with on a regular basis. commercial art is a constant balancing act to meet deadlines in order to be profitable.

if you want to get technical, the reason why video games are difficult to define as a product, service, art, etc...is because it is both commercial art and fine art brought into one medium, but unlike movies or tv, carries a new way for fine art to communicate with it's user/viewer, which makes it very difficult to define. you cant put a price on the actual experience of its user, since it is not a tangible item. commercial art is a service/product, while fine art is anything but.

dadaism suggests everything is art. other than that idk how to define where art comes from.
 
Krynn72 said:
Masterfully clever sir.

The rest of your post is all fine and dandy, but again, not many people care about or use backwards compatibility.

So their decision to use different architecture in the 360/ps3 makes a fair amount of sense
in effort to curb rampant piracy.

The decision to revert back to standard architecture also makes sense since the burden on developers was bigger than anticipated (but not so big that it prevented Gabe Newell from reversing his hate-stance on the PS3).

I agree that the anti-piracy measures being taken with the One are abysmal though, but right now there is no good way to handle piracy, so no matter what they do we will hate it.
Click to expand...

vocalized

http://vocaroo.com/i/s1lgk87DAAtw
 
BHC, you have permanently affixed yourself to my shit-list. Although, you at least had the decency to not bark into the mic.
 
ríomhaire said:
I like the idea of triggers with haptic feedback.
Click to expand...

MS gave journalists some hands-on time with the new controller and according to Jeff Gerstmann the triggers don't really do haptic feedback. Instead it's like just two extra rumble motors in the pad, on top of the two that were in the old one, but used to provide a kind of specific rumble for the triggers, used in situations like eg. revving a car and feeling the engine flutter, or feeling a heart beat. In other words, there won't be any real sense of calculated resistance on the triggers (reportedly).
 
You really think Jeff's fat fingers are able to perceive force feedback?
 
There's a lot of misinformation going around. There's no fee for used games. Also using that scene for humor defies the sanctity of one of my favorite thrillers of all time :(
 
Laivasse said:
MS gave journalists some hands-on time with the new controller and according to Jeff Gerstmann the triggers don't really do haptic feedback. Instead it's like just two extra rumble motors in the pad, on top of the two that were in the old one, but used to provide a kind of specific rumble for the triggers, used in situations like eg. revving a car and feeling the engine flutter, or feeling a heart beat. In other words, there won't be any real sense of calculated resistance on the triggers (reportedly).
Click to expand...
:(
 
"I watched the live stream on my XBOX 360 and my Kinect paused the video every time a presenter said "XBOX ..." which is ironic."

Yeah that's so ironic man.
 
Vegeta897 said:
"I watched the live stream on my XBOX 360 and my Kinect paused the video every time a presenter said "XBOX ..." which is ironic."

Yeah that's so ironic man.
Click to expand...

And it looks like twenty guys shared that "irony" to their friends thinking it was irony and another six loved it because they actually believed it was irony, which is ironic.

Is me not knowing irony also ironic? Because I haven't a clue what it means, ironically.
 
after the reveal I now think we might actually have a console that will fail faster than the wiiU. as much as the wiiU is underpowered and lacking in games none of it is anti-consumer or creepy(always on Kinect) like xbox1
 
TBH the only thing I really care about is exclusives (and if I'll have to pay Xbox Live Gold for features in offline games or access to DLC/expansions or some shit) so while I have better expectations for the PS4 than the X1 I'll just wait and see what the actual games are.
 
Haha^ I have that same exact VCR model. I used to use it to tape episodes of DBZ
 
apparently someone bought and registered the XboxOne.com and XboxOne.net domains before microsoft did.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/26/microsoft-files-complaint-to-acquire-xbox-one-websites
http://www.gamespot.com/news/microsoft-files-to-recover-xbox-one-domains-report-6408919

they name the console Xbox One before securing domains, or dont secure the domains because they dont want to tip off the public, but someone buys the domains before they can.

its planet piss all over again! GOD DAMNIT TOKI!

what an epic backfire.

i cannot...wow...holy ****ing shit microsoft....holy ****ing shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Chris D
Forum update
Replies
8
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
-smash-
Many have been affected by a large VAC ban wave
Replies
3
Views
19K
Otto-Grainer
O
Back
Top