PDA

View Full Version : Electronic Arts Selected for Multi-Year Agreement for the Future of Star Wars Gaming



Darth Metalmute
05-06-2013, 04:23 PM
Ugh... There are much better developers out there than EA, but at least BioWare will get to continue developing their star wars games. I would have loved, however, someone like 2K Games get a shot at bringing the "BioShock" experience to a Star Wars game.

Noticeably missing is the mention of Star Wars 1313.

Speaking of which, did anyone happen to see the hour-long Battlefront 3 preview? Looked really promising.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
05-06-2013, 04:39 PM
I'm not up on video games anymore, but hasn't EA annoyed a ton of gamers with their "always-on" nonsense and lots of related issues? We'll see how this shakes out, but at the moment it doesn't look like people are too pleased with this (but then again, why should that be different than anything they've announced since the buyout?).

If nothing else, I am glad to see that they'll still be making Star Wars games for consoles and not just mobile devices, since early quotes made it seem like this was the case.

Darth Metalmute
05-06-2013, 07:44 PM
Yeah, EA does alot of things that tick their audience off. A lot of those things require joining Origin and having to go from console to mobile devices to play a game.

JediTricks
05-06-2013, 08:29 PM
Ugh... There are much better developers out there than EA, but at least BioWare will get to continue developing their star wars games. I would have loved, however, someone like 2K Games get a shot at bringing the "BioShock" experience to a Star Wars game.

Noticeably missing is the mention of Star Wars 1313.

Speaking of which, did anyone happen to see the hour-long Battlefront 3 preview? Looked really promising.Ugh indeed, EA sucks mightily, they're considered among the worst offenders in the industry of... everything. I don't look forward to annual title re-ups and on-disc DLC and overly-aggressive anti-piracy measures.

Not sure how BioWare continuing on is a good thing, SW:TOR hasn't so much knocked socks off as bored audiences away, it's like they're coasting off of KOTOR from a decade ago.

Wow, gee, totally surprised nobody wanted to license 1313 with all its layers upon layers of proprietary technology that'd need to be separately licensed and then all the development having been scrapped in place of a Boba Fett game that went nowhere. :rolleyes: Thanks Disney, jerks.


I'm not up on video games anymore, but hasn't EA annoyed a ton of gamers with their "always-on" nonsense and lots of related issues? We'll see how this shakes out, but at the moment it doesn't look like people are too pleased with this (but then again, why should that be different than anything they've announced since the buyout?).

If nothing else, I am glad to see that they'll still be making Star Wars games for consoles and not just mobile devices, since early quotes made it seem like this was the case.Yeah, EA really blew it with Sim City's bogus "always on" requirement that made launch week a total disaster, and then it turns out the game's online AI doesn't work at all so the game COULD have been played offline easily and they were just covering up for another awful anti-piracy measure.

Darth Metalmute
05-06-2013, 09:49 PM
Not sure how BioWare continuing on is a good thing, SW:TOR hasn't so much knocked socks off as bored audiences away, it's like they're coasting off of KOTOR from a decade ago.

I guess it's because I'm still hoping they strike gold again with a game like KOTOR. The Mass Effect series was really well done, and I would like to see something like that done with Star Wars.

There are so many great video game developers out there, why sign a deal so quickly? I would have loved to see what the people at 2K games could do to a Star Wars game, or the Assassins Creed people at UbiSoft. Even 343 Industries or the developers over at Bungie would have brought a much needed new perspective the the Star Wars Universe. But with EA Games getting the contract, we know what we are going to get; cruddy game mechanics, stupid copyright gimmicks, ridiculous mobile game tie-ins, and a giant slap in the face from the current Star Wars establishment that it becoming a center point of the new reign.

You know what else bothers me about the termination of LucasArts? We never got a decent ending to The Force Unleashed. I know TFU2 was a complete slap in the face of the fans of the series, but it would have been nice to see how it ended.

El Chuxter
05-06-2013, 10:07 PM
Maybe I'm out of the loop more than I thought, but I seem to recall EA being one of the best 10-20 years ago. What changed?

Lord Malakite
05-07-2013, 04:21 PM
Yeah, EA really blew it with Sim City's bogus "always on" requirement that made launch week a total disaster, and then it turns out the game's online AI doesn't work at all so the game COULD have been played offline easily and they were just covering up for another awful anti-piracy measure.
You think Sim City's "always on" requirement is bad, just wait till Microsoft's next generation Xbox comes out if the rumors are true. Now that will be a total disaster. Microsoft is supposed to announce the next gen system on May 21st, but right now the rumor is (from several credible insiders) that its supposed to have an "always on" requirement. If you aren't online the games simply won't play. Its supposed to be part of Microsoft's new strategy to appease publishers by preventing owners from playing used games. While a game disc will be required to play, the games themselves will be required to be downloaded directly onto the new Xbox's hard drive to play (as opposed to playing directly off the disc). Each disc will then have its own unique identification internally that the new Xbox will constantly check to the game data on the hard drive and the new Xbox system data/game data that is stored on your Xbox Live account.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
05-07-2013, 05:18 PM
You know what else bothers me about the termination of LucasArts? We never got a decent ending to The Force Unleashed. I know TFU2 was a complete slap in the face of the fans of the series, but it would have been nice to see how it ended.
It's entirely possible that there will still be a Force Unleashed III - and now it won't be from the same team that brought us the rushed FU II (whose acronym is very appropriate). FU III, 1313, and Battlefront III should probably at the top of EA's list if they want to please the fans.

JediTricks
05-07-2013, 05:33 PM
I guess it's because I'm still hoping they strike gold again with a game like KOTOR. The Mass Effect series was really well done, and I would like to see something like that done with Star Wars. EA and BioWare catches a lot of flak for the Mass Effect series ending though. The thing about BioWare is they've been spread too thin, so repeating KOTOR levels of quality would be difficult if not impossible.


There are so many great video game developers out there, why sign a deal so quickly? I would have loved to see what the people at 2K games could do to a Star Wars game, or the Assassins Creed people at UbiSoft. Even 343 Industries or the developers over at Bungie would have brought a much needed new perspective the the Star Wars Universe. But with EA Games getting the contract, we know what we are going to get; cruddy game mechanics, stupid copyright gimmicks, ridiculous mobile game tie-ins, and a giant slap in the face from the current Star Wars establishment that it becoming a center point of the new reign. Yup, all right on the money.


You know what else bothers me about the termination of LucasArts? We never got a decent ending to The Force Unleashed. I know TFU2 was a complete slap in the face of the fans of the series, but it would have been nice to see how it ended.Never thought about that, but it really doesn't feel complete. TFU feels complete without TFU2, but TFU2 doesn't feel complete at all.



Maybe I'm out of the loop more than I thought, but I seem to recall EA being one of the best 10-20 years ago. What changed?You're really thinking about the EA of the SNES/Sega Genesis years, and they've become a giant insane company-eating conglomerate in the last decade or so. The last few years at EA have been all about annually milking franchises without notable improvements, microtransactions ("$5 to buy this car" and such), DLC, in-game advertising, a downward spiral in game-quality, and over-the-top DRM.



You think Sim City's "always on" requirement is bad, just wait till Microsoft's next generation Xbox comes out if the rumors are true. Now that will be a total disaster. Microsoft is supposed to announce the next gen system on May 21st, but right now the rumor is (from several credible insiders) that its supposed to have an "always on" requirement. If you aren't online the games simply won't play. Its supposed to be part of Microsoft's new strategy to appease publishers by preventing owners from playing used games. While a game disc will be required to play, the games themselves will be required to be downloaded directly onto the new Xbox's hard drive to play (as opposed to playing directly off the disc). Each disc will then have its own unique identification internally that the new Xbox will constantly check to the game data on the hard drive and the new Xbox system data/game data that is stored on your Xbox Live account.Here's the thing, with the Xbox, you know what you're getting into, you know in advance that it will require an always-online connection, and you can choose not to buy it because of that at the outset. With SimCity's launch, they really didn't tell you that, they undersold the problem and didn't recognize the demand, EA didn't invest enough in server technology to support that launch and it crushed it. Then they lied and mislead and made promises they couldn't keep to support the problem. And it wasn't on a console, it was on your own PC - you had no choice thanks to EA.

As for the next Xbox being always online, there's a new rumor that Microsoft has reversed course on that: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/05/microsoft-next-xbox-will-work-even-when-your-internet-doesnt/

If they stick with this always-on DRM crap and require huge installs to the drive, there won't be much market for it. The industry has been trying to enact these 1-disc, 1-machine ideas for decades now to no avail, I doubt Microsoft will succeed where nobody else has.

Darth Metalmute
05-07-2013, 07:52 PM
There would be such a huge anti-trust lawsuit if the next gen consoles pulled that crap. It would completely shut down several companies whose sole purpose is renting games.


EA and BioWare catches a lot of flak for the Mass Effect series ending though. The thing about BioWare is they've been spread too thin, so repeating KOTOR levels of quality would be difficult if not impossible.

I never understand what they did with that ending. It's like they put all this time and effort into a great game, then were cut short on time. Even the extra ending that was downloadable content wasn't acceptable.

JediTricks
05-08-2013, 02:39 PM
Ok, so news hit that Frostbite 3, EA's next-gen gaming engine that most of their upcoming games will be based on including whatever Star Wars they put out, will NOT be running on the Wii U.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05/07/wii-u-frostbite-engine-tests-yield-not-too-promising-results/

Their current engine, Frostbite 2, yielded "not too promising results" on Nintendo's next-gen console, so EA isn't going to try to jam Frostbite 3 onto the machine at all. EA also doesn't do a lot of ported games, aside from sports and driving games. This very likely means that...

NEW STAR WARS GAMES WON'T BE ON THE WII U

As if gamers needed any more reason to be annoyed with Disney's purchase of Lucasfilm.

Oh, but if they did, EA announced that new Star Wars games won't be out before March 2014:
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05/07/no-star-wars-games-in-fy-2014-ea-says/



There would be such a huge anti-trust lawsuit if the next gen consoles pulled that crap. It would completely shut down several companies whose sole purpose is renting games. Likely not, it hasn't stopped previous attempts at this sort of DRM in the past, it hasn't stopped booksellers with e-books (they've gone after pricing, not distribution), it hasn't affected itunes on the ios medium. Look at EA's Online Pass system, it makes renting or reselling multiplayer online games from them unplayable without buying an extra pass, that's already fully legal. And with more and more game sales going digital-distribution, there's no rental possible anyway. No, sadly if this went through the industry would get away with it, and the consumers would suffer. They'd simply argue that the needs of the market have changed, nobody forced Hollywood studios to keep making VHS tapes when DVDs took over just because Blockbuster was making the majority of their money off rentals.


I never understand what they did with that ending. It's like they put all this time and effort into a great game, then were cut short on time. Even the extra ending that was downloadable content wasn't acceptable.I hear that, it really does seem like they just ran out of resources and spewed out whatever.


Regarding the "always on console" conversation, Sony said they haven't considered such a thing because not everybody has great internet: http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/08/sony-didnt-consider-always-on-playstation-4
Of course, maybe Microsoft doesn't give a fart about gamers who can't afford super awesome broadband internet anyway because they're not likely to buy as much digital product from Microsoft. Classy!

Lord Malakite
05-09-2013, 12:31 AM
Here's the thing, with the Xbox, you know what you're getting into, you know in advance that it will require an always-online connection, and you can choose not to buy it because of that at the outset. With SimCity's launch, they really didn't tell you that, they undersold the problem and didn't recognize the demand, EA didn't invest enough in server technology to support that launch and it crushed it. Then they lied and mislead and made promises they couldn't keep to support the problem. And it wasn't on a console, it was on your own PC - you had no choice thanks to EA.
I suppose that is true. Those of us that keep up to date on the latest news when it comes to video games will know in advance. I can still see it becoming disaster though in regards to the general public.


As for the next Xbox being always online, there's a new rumor that Microsoft has reversed course on that: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/05/microsoft-next-xbox-will-work-even-when-your-internet-doesnt/
I've heard it both ways. From what I've read it theoretically sounds like if such a feature is present in the next gen Xbox that Microsoft has it set up in such a way that they have the ability to toggle the "always online" requirement on/off via an online software patch at the drop of a hat.


If they stick with this always-on DRM crap and require huge installs to the drive, there won't be much market for it. The industry has been trying to enact these 1-disc, 1-machine ideas for decades now to no avail, I doubt Microsoft will succeed where nobody else has. Whether or not they succeed at it doesn't mean they won't try it.


There would be such a huge anti-trust lawsuit if the next gen consoles pulled that crap. It would completely shut down several companies whose sole purpose is renting games.
Yeah, it would completely suck. Nothing is concrete at the moment though. We'll know more come the 21st. If any of this rumored stuff about the next gen Xbox is true though I think its safe to say the PS4 (which unlike the PS3 is very developer friendly) will be well on its way of pulling ahead this gen.

Lord Malakite
05-18-2013, 06:58 AM
Their current engine, Frostbite 2, yielded "not too promising results" on Nintendo's next-gen console, so EA isn't going to try to jam Frostbite 3 onto the machine at all. EA also doesn't do a lot of ported games, aside from sports and driving games. This very likely means that...

NEW STAR WARS GAMES WON'T BE ON THE WII U

As if gamers needed any more reason to be annoyed with Disney's purchase of Lucasfilm.

While this isn't EA's official stance (as a company) this story over at IGN (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/17/ea-senior-engineer-the-wii-u-is-crap?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook) kind of says how the guys working at EA feel about the Wii U.

El Chuxter
05-18-2013, 10:57 AM
Hell, I'm a Wii fan, and I think the Wii U is the dumbest thing I've ever seen and lament that it essentially means the death of future Wii games.

Darth Metalmute
05-18-2013, 10:44 PM
I'll never understand what Nintendo does anymore. However, Wii-U isn't the strangest thing to come out of Japan. That being said, outside of Zelda, Metroid, and Mario, their systems aren't really worth getting.

El Chuxter
05-18-2013, 11:17 PM
There were quite a few games for the Wii that made it worth having, particularly Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Wii Sports Resort. The Lego games were also quite fun, but, as third-party games go, they were kinda the exception.

However, instead of improving on the motion gimmick that made it unique, they went to that weird "laptop controller" mess. Also, it's not backwards compatible to the GameCube, despite using the same discs, which was one advantage the Wii had over the PS3 and XBox 360 (neither of which was 100% backwards compatible). They need to re-examine what makes them unique and popular, because, while I don't think it's quite time to pronounce them dead yet, they're inching closer to that time.

JediTricks
05-19-2013, 03:30 PM
While this isn't EA's official stance (as a company) this story over at IGN (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/17/ea-senior-engineer-the-wii-u-is-crap?utm_campaign=fbposts&utm_source=facebook) kind of says how the guys working at EA feel about the Wii U.Yeah, I saw that. Not the classiest way to express one's self when one works in the game industry, but the machine is nonsense.


Hell, I'm a Wii fan, and I think the Wii U is the dumbest thing I've ever seen and lament that it essentially means the death of future Wii games.I think it's hilarious how it works with the Wii stuff, but doesn't come with any Wii controllers or equipment.


There were quite a few games for the Wii that made it worth having, particularly Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Wii Sports Resort. The Lego games were also quite fun, but, as third-party games go, they were kinda the exception.

However, instead of improving on the motion gimmick that made it unique, they went to that weird "laptop controller" mess. Also, it's not backwards compatible to the GameCube, despite using the same discs, which was one advantage the Wii had over the PS3 and XBox 360 (neither of which was 100% backwards compatible). They need to re-examine what makes them unique and popular, because, while I don't think it's quite time to pronounce them dead yet, they're inching closer to that time.It's not even a laptop controller, it's meant to cash in on the Tablet craze, but the guts of the video controller have no computing systems, it's just designed to transmit input data and receive and display video data through a slightly modified WIFI N connection, it's ridiculous.

And why call it a "Wii" (as in "together") "U" (as in "alone")? It's a half-baked premise for a half-baked console, should have called it what it really is, the Wii HD - Pain in the Wii.

El Chuxter
05-19-2013, 04:17 PM
Oh, I said "laptop controller" only in reference to the absurd size of the thing.

Lord Malakite
05-19-2013, 05:36 PM
I think it's hilarious how it works with the Wii stuff, but doesn't come with any Wii controllers or equipment.
I think the general idea was that a majority of people buying the Wii U wouldn't need the Wii stuff packaged with the system on account that they likely already owned said stuff from the original Wii system. Why make the system unnecessarily more expensive when a majority of the perspective buyers already own it.


It's not even a laptop controller, it's meant to cash in on the Tablet craze, but the guts of the video controller have no computing systems, it's just designed to transmit input data and receive and display video data through a slightly modified WIFI N connection, it's ridiculous.
You know, I've never really looked at it as trying to cash in on the tablet craze. I see it more as trying to cash in on the success of the Nintendo DS in home console form. The TV is the upper DS screen and the touch screen on the Wii U controller is the lower touch screen of the DS.


And why call it a "Wii" (as in "together") "U" (as in "alone")? It's a half-baked premise for a half-baked console, should have called it what it really is, the Wii HD - Pain in the Wii.
Yeah, the execution this time around hasn't been that great. I still applaud them for trying to do something new for the system though like adding DS elements to a home console or the ability to play your game while someone else watches TV.

El Chuxter
05-19-2013, 07:26 PM
I think going to HD, allowing the Wii 2 to play blu-rays, continuing to offer full backward compatibility, and introducing a better WiiMote would've been the way to go, and would've been what the market preferred. The Wii took the gaming world somewhat by surprise. Sure, it was mocked for how limited it was in some regards, but the novelty got a lot of people buying it who wouldn't have thought twice of it. Even Sony and Microsoft tried to jump on the craze with the Move and Kinect. The Move I have not tried (and it looks silly), and Kinect is the buggiest piece of crap I've ever seen and it's tough to see why Microsoft didn't dump it within a few months. The WiiMote worked quite well, and the WiiMote Plus even better. Why not get better at what people want, and other companies can't come close to matching you on?

Lord Malakite
05-20-2013, 12:04 PM
I think going to HD, allowing the Wii 2 to play blu-rays, continuing to offer full backward compatibility, and introducing a better WiiMote would've been the way to go, and would've been what the market preferred.
While I can get behind the HD (since most people have HD TVs at this point) and even better Wiimote motion controls, the problem with the rest of that argument is that it would of driven up the cost of the system needlessly by adding that extra hardware needed for Gamecube compatibility and paying licensing fees to Sony for blu-ray. Nintendo wanted to keep the cost down to maximize profit, especially since most people already have alternative means for those features (standalone DVD/blu-ray players, PS3 with blu-ray, a Gamecube, original Wii with Gamecube compatibility, etc). Unlike Nintendo's systems, Microsoft and Sony's systems (which are already being sold at a substantially more expensive price than Nintendo systems to begin with) are actually being sold at a greater loss. If they were being sold at their actual retail value they would be closer to the $600 to $800 price range. In fact, with as long as the PS3 and Xbox 360 systems have been on the market, they are only just recently on the cusp of seeing a profit. The Wii U system on the other hand, while also being sold at a loss and having dismal sales since its launch, is already in the black by some reports. The same likely cant be said of the upcoming PS4 and new Xbox until several years have passed. For the record though, Gamecube hasn't been entirely forgotten about by Nintendo for the Wii U. The Gamecube (like the NES, SNES, N64 and other company's previous systems) is supposed to be eventually available to some extent on the Virtual Console.


Even Sony and Microsoft tried to jump on the craze with the Move and Kinect. The Move I have not tried (and it looks silly), and Kinect is the buggiest piece of crap I've ever seen and it's tough to see why Microsoft didn't dump it within a few months. The WiiMote worked quite well, and the WiiMote Plus even better. Why not get better at what people want, and other companies can't come close to matching you on?
Sony and Microsoft's new systems are also either already confirmed (PS4) or rumored (next Xbox) to be jumping on the "touch craze" to some extent like the Wii U. Sony's PS4 "duelshock 4" controller will have a touch pad (similar to a laptop's touch pad) on it. Sony also recently took out a patent for a "touch screen" game controller similar to the Wii U's touch screen controller. The new Xbox is also rumored to have a touch pad on it's controller. The new systems are also going to continue to support the motion functions of their predecessors. The PS4 has PS move compatibility. The new Xbox system is rumored to come bundled with an improved Kinect. Microsoft is also working on a project known as IllumiRoom. By combining a Kinect camera and a projector, IllumiRoom turns the area around your television into a game screen. The Kinect captures the appearance and geometry of the room, and then it uses this data to adapt the extra visuals that are projected against the wall and furniture around your TV.

El Chuxter
05-20-2013, 01:03 PM
I want to go back in time and kill Steve Jobs as an infant, preventing this touch-screen thing from ever catching on. The screens never seem to work for me, so I guess I'm going to have to be stuck in the stone age forever since everything is moving in that direction. :(

JediTricks
05-21-2013, 03:39 PM
Oh, I said "laptop controller" only in reference to the absurd size of the thing.Ah. I dunno, it's definitely more tablet sized than laptop big, it's not THAT big, it's smaller than an ipad.


I think the general idea was that a majority of people buying the Wii U wouldn't need the Wii stuff packaged with the system on account that they likely already owned said stuff from the original Wii system. Why make the system unnecessarily more expensive when a majority of the perspective buyers already own it.Locking yourself into only 1 sales audience is dumb, now instead of getting consumers who were on the fence with the Wii and passed, you're ensuring they're not going to join the party. Who wants to buy a $300 console that doesn't come with its chief playing mechanism? The Wii Pad (ha!) is not really its chief control mechanism for the majority of software being sold on the machine.


You know, I've never really looked at it as trying to cash in on the tablet craze. I see it more as trying to cash in on the success of the Nintendo DS in home console form. The TV is the upper DS screen and the touch screen on the Wii U controller is the lower touch screen of the DS.I can see how that's sort of the idea, but the DS doesn't have motion controls, the DS has 2 screens right next to each other for a single user while the Wii U's Pad is often touted as coordinated play between 2 players, it's definitely got some of the current tablet crazy feel to its premise IMO. It's got motion controls, NFC, a camera and speakers, that's tablet territory, even if some are also on the DS.


While I can get behind the HD (since most people have HD TVs at this point) and even better Wiimote motion controls, the problem with the rest of that argument is that it would of driven up the cost of the system needlessly by adding that extra hardware needed for Gamecube compatibility and paying licensing fees to Sony for blu-ray. Nintendo wanted to keep the cost down to maximize profit, especially since most people already have alternative means for those features (standalone DVD/blu-ray players, PS3 with blu-ray, a Gamecube, original Wii with Gamecube compatibility, etc). Unlike Nintendo's systems, Microsoft and Sony's systems (which are already being sold at a substantially more expensive price than Nintendo systems to begin with) are actually being sold at a greater loss. If they were being sold at their actual retail value they would be closer to the $600 to $800 price range. In fact, with as long as the PS3 and Xbox 360 systems have been on the market, they are only just recently on the cusp of seeing a profit. The Wii U system on the other hand, while also being sold at a loss and having dismal sales since its launch, is already in the black by some reports. The same likely cant be said of the upcoming PS4 and new Xbox until several years have passed. For the record though, Gamecube hasn't been entirely forgotten about by Nintendo for the Wii U. The Gamecube (like the NES, SNES, N64 and other company's previous systems) is supposed to be eventually available to some extent on the Virtual Console.The PS3 has been sold at a profit for the last 3 years, the Xbox 360 for the last 5 years.

Meanwhile, the Wii U is sold at a loss - despite its middling hardware (seriously, who puts a 1.2ghz tri-core CPU, a 550mhz GPU, and just 2gb RAM, and 8gb flash memory in a next-gen console?!? My cellphone has better specs and it's a cellphone) - and without the blu-ray and gamecube emulation (which WOULD have been easy had they put truly next-gen hardware in this thing) the Wii U's sales are in a tailspin, April's sales were down 19% from March's.


Sony and Microsoft's new systems are also either already confirmed (PS4) or rumored (next Xbox) to be jumping on the "touch craze" to some extent like the Wii U. Sony's PS4 "duelshock 4" controller will have a touch pad (similar to a laptop's touch pad) on it. Sony also recently took out a patent for a "touch screen" game controller similar to the Wii U's touch screen controller. The new Xbox is also rumored to have a touch pad on it's controller. The new systems are also going to continue to support the motion functions of their predecessors. The PS4 has PS move compatibility. The new Xbox system is rumored to come bundled with an improved Kinect. Microsoft is also working on a project known as IllumiRoom. By combining a Kinect camera and a projector, IllumiRoom turns the area around your television into a game screen. The Kinect captures the appearance and geometry of the room, and then it uses this data to adapt the extra visuals that are projected against the wall and furniture around your TV.The Xbox One's controller doesn't have touch elements, it's essentially the same as the 360's controller but with individual force-feedback to buttons.

The improved Kinect (Kinect 2.0) is sold separately and not doing any room-projecting at launch.


I want to go back in time and kill Steve Jobs as an infant, preventing this touch-screen thing from ever catching on. The screens never seem to work for me, so I guess I'm going to have to be stuck in the stone age forever since everything is moving in that direction. :(Steve Jobs didn't invent touch screen or even pioneer it. If it hadn't been the ipad, it would have been a different tablet device, Microsoft had been trying to do touchscreen computing for years before Apple. And the Palm Pilot came before the Apple Newton.

If the screens don't recognize your touch, your skin may be too dry, try moisturizing. My devices are excellent at reading touch but my mom's hands occasionally have a missed gesture.

The new Samsung Galaxy S4 has an improved digitizer, so in a year or so I'm sure most cheaper phones will step up their touchscreen game as well.



There would be such a huge anti-trust lawsuit if the next gen consoles pulled that crap. It would completely shut down several companies whose sole purpose is renting games. So, the news is out on the Xbox One, the next-gen Xbox. It has 8gb of ram, a 500gb harddrive, an 8-core CPU (no clock data yet I think), wifi-n, USB 3.0, Blu-Ray... and every game disk requires an install, which is supposed to lock out used sales without an extra purchase. That's some nerve. Sounds like game rental companies are going to be in trouble.

Lord Malakite
05-21-2013, 09:02 PM
The PS3 has been sold at a profit for the last 3 years, the Xbox 360 for the last 5 years.

Meanwhile, the Wii U is sold at a loss - despite its middling hardware (seriously, who puts a 1.2ghz tri-core CPU, a 550mhz GPU, and just 2gb RAM, and 8gb flash memory in a next-gen console?!? My cellphone has better specs and it's a cellphone) - and without the blu-ray and gamecube emulation (which WOULD have been easy had they put truly next-gen hardware in this thing) the Wii U's sales are in a tailspin, April's sales were down 19% from March's.
I think there is some misunderstanding as to what I was saying. PS3 and Xbox 360 has indeed been sold at a profit for the last few years now on a system by system basis. Prior to that though the systems were sold at a loss (under the premise that they could make up the money in game licensing fees). As a whole PS3 and Xbox 360 are in the red (http://www.vg247.com/2013/01/07/xbox-360-and-ps3-losses-total-8-billion-ex-sony-employee-paints-grim-future/). The Wii U on the other hand (while currently being sold at a loss) is actually, as a whole, has already made up that difference (http://www.gameskinny.com/xwdg3/selling-one-game-makes-the-wii-u-profitable) (on currently available systems) from game licensing fees.


The Xbox One's controller doesn't have touch elements, it's essentially the same as the 360's controller but with individual force-feedback to buttons.

The improved Kinect (Kinect 2.0) is sold separately and not doing any room-projecting at launch.
Keep in mind that the touch pad for the controller was only rumored and the system had not yet been revealed when I posted that. With that said, touch elements still feature into the system. Xbox One supports SmartGlass, an application that allows mobile devices (like tablets and smart phones) to potentially serve as second screens and controllers. As for the new Kinect, I haven't heard any mention of it being sold separately. Honestly it seems unlikely it would be sold separately given the fact its been confirmed that the system requires the new Kinect to be connected (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/Kinect_2). It is unclear what Microsoft has planned for IllumiRoom (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/IllumiRoom) in future, though I don't think anyone realistically expected it at Xbox One's launch.



So, the news is out on the Xbox One, the next-gen Xbox. It has 8gb of ram, a 500gb harddrive, an 8-core CPU (no clock data yet I think), wifi-n, USB 3.0, Blu-Ray... and every game disk requires an install, which is supposed to lock out used sales without an extra purchase. That's some nerve. Sounds like game rental companies are going to be in trouble.
The RAM of Xbox One is 8GB GDDR3, as opposed to PS4's 8GB GDDR5. You can play a game that you own using your own account from any Xbox One system, though you can't share that game with others unless they're either signed into your account as you or are playing their account on the same system as your account. This means in addition to used game sales you'd also likely have to pay that extra fee if you just plan on borrowing the game from a friend or renting the game through something like Redbox/Gamefly/Blockbuster/etc. In addition, if someone else pays the fee to use said game on their system, its reported that the previous install of said game will be deactivated to the original owner. This has some potential serious implications. It likely means that if the game were "borrowed" not only would the borrower have to pay the fee, but the original owner would likely also have to pay the fee to play their game again after the other person borrowing it was done.

Lord Malakite
05-22-2013, 01:47 PM
As for the next Xbox being always online, there's a new rumor that Microsoft has reversed course on that:
Finally got the low down on the "always online" requirement that was rumored to be and then not to be. Turns out we have an Obi-Wan "certain point of view" scenario going on there. As you probably already heard from the Xbox One unveiling yesterday, the system doesn't literally have to be "always online" 24/7 in order to work. The system does however require a mandatory internet connection though in order for it to even function. For the Xbox One to start up, it will need to have an online connection every time the system is turned on. I'm assuming this means only when the system is turned on from a completely off state (unplugged/no power), not when the system is turned on from an "off state" in which the system is technically still on in a low power/sleep mode (for auto updates over the internet and such). In order to play a video game, even if it is single-player, the Xbox One will also need to be online for the initial install of the game and again at least once every 24 hours after that otherwise the game will become disabled.

Darth Metalmute
05-22-2013, 09:19 PM
Finally got the low down on the "always online" requirement that was rumored to be and then not to be. Turns out we have an Obi-Wan "certain point of view" scenario going on there. As you probably already heard from the Xbox One unveiling yesterday, the system doesn't literally have to be "always online" 24/7 in order to work. The system does however require a mandatory internet connection though in order for it to even function. For the Xbox One to start up, it will need to have an online connection every time the system is turned on. I'm assuming this means only when the system is turned on from a completely off state (unplugged/no power), not when the system is turned on from an "off state" in which the system is technically still on in a low power/sleep mode (for auto updates over the internet and such). In order to play a video game, even if it is single-player, the Xbox One will also need to be online for the initial install of the game and again at least once every 24 hours after that otherwise the game will become disabled.


Does this mean that casual gamers will have to pay a fee if they don't play daily?

Sounds like "jail-breaking" your X-Box will be the easy answer.

El Chuxter
05-22-2013, 10:21 PM
So, if you go on vacation and disconnect your router to save power, your games won't work?

That. Is. Bull. Shevik.

Lord Malakite
05-22-2013, 11:03 PM
Does this mean that casual gamers will have to pay a fee if they don't play daily?

Sounds like "jail-breaking" your X-Box will be the easy answer.


So, if you go on vacation and disconnect your router to save power, your games won't work?

That. Is. Bull. Shevik.
In regard to paying a fee if you don't check in daily Metalmute, that would be a no. The extra fee stuff pertains to Microsoft wanting a cut of used video game sales, and by extension, the implications it will also have (be it intentional or unintentional) on borrowing games from family/friends and/or game rentals. In regards to what El Chuxter is asking about games not working if you go on vacation and unplug your stuff, the answer is sort of. The game should work for about 24 hours give or take if you don't check in with an online connection. After the 24 hour period is up though the game will cease to work. But from the way it sounds your games will become reactivated automatically the next time the system connects to the internet. So you should be alright to unplug your system and go on vacation. Yeah, your game will cease to work while you are gone, but you aren't there to play it (so that shouldn't matter) and it'll be good to go once you get back and connect to the internet. Now if you want to play your video games and say you have an internet outage that last several days in your area or you have your system in a place that has little or no internet access (like you had to cut off your internet for financial reasons or if you are in the military where internet may not be readily available depending on where you are stationed), then you would be in trouble. This could also screw the system's longevity beyond this current generation if you think about it. Once Microsoft moves on to their next generation console 5 to 10 years from now they'll eventually stop supporting the Xbox One system (which is the natural fate of all past consoles sooner or later). By extension the online servers used to support the Xbox One will also stop being supported in favor of the next generation console and its servers. With older systems (NES, SNES, etc.) you can play the systems to this day if you own them in working condition. No servers for the Xbox One though to check into equals "expensive brick" past this generation.

Darth Metalmute
05-23-2013, 07:27 PM
According to Phil Harrison and confirmed by Larry Hryb, the fee to play a used game, or a borrow game, will be full price.

Way to screw everyone over Microsoft. PS4 is still hush-hush on the issue. Maybe they are waiting to see the backlash of XBOX One.

Lord Malakite
05-24-2013, 12:48 AM
According to Phil Harrison and confirmed by Larry Hryb, the fee to play a used game, or a borrow game, will be full price. Way to screw everyone over Microsoft.
I must say that the Xbox One (as a video game console) so far has underwhelmed me in just about every possible way from its revealing the other day. Aside from a few brief trailers and graphical picture comparisons (of an Xbox One Call of Duty game to an Xbox 360 Call of Duty game) the games were completely skipped over. Microsoft rather spend the gamer's time showing us how your video game console should be used for everything that isn't about gaming because of how quick you can switch from watching TV, to streaming movies/shows, to using the internet to browse or skype. You then have the BS Q&As afterwards with all these employees giving ambiguous and even conflicting answers (left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing) of the restrictions/requirements with internet connections and used game fees etc... its just one big nightmare of a headache. But hey, as long as Microsoft can produce and stream new/exclusive TV shows like "Halo: The TV Series" by Steven Spielberg through Xbox Live Gold Membership (similar to what Netflix is doing with the new season of Arrested Development) all is good right? :tired: Microsoft has dug themselves one serious ditch. They are going to have to bring their A game to E3 with concrete system info: cost, release date, step by step explanation of used game fee (concerning how the transfer of game rights will work, how it will effect borrowing/rentals, etc.), how the system works with cable/satellite services. Even then, I don't think that many gamers will be touting that Xbox One as a definite winner this generation. "Xbox Won" alright. :suspicion:

PS4 is still hush-hush on the issue. Maybe they are waiting to see the backlash of XBOX One.
Sony has gone on record as saying that the PS4 will play used games and that they would never think of completely blocking used games. At face value this sounds reassuring, but upon closer inspection the statement does leave a lot of ambiguity for broad interpretation. Could mean used games will be treated as they always have been for all previous console generations. Then again it could mean a similar situation as the Xbox One (technically the used game isn't completely blocked, its only blocked till you pay an added fee). This patent taken out by Sony not to long ago (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2013/0007892.html) would suggest the Xbox One scenario. Hopefully more clarification comes at E3 in about three weeks. Suddenly Wii U, even with all its faults, isn't looking so bad.

preacher
05-24-2013, 01:32 AM
I must say that the Xbox One (as a video game console) so far has underwhelmed me in just about every possible way from its revealing the other day. Aside from a few brief trailers and graphical picture comparisons (of an Xbox One Call of Duty game to an Xbox 360 Call of Duty game) the games were completely skipped over. Microsoft rather spend the gamer's time showing us how your video game console should be used for everything that isn't about gaming because of how quick you can switch from watching TV, to streaming movies/shows, to using the internet to browse or skype. You then have the BS Q&As afterwards with all these employees giving ambiguous and even conflicting answers (left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing) of the restrictions/requirements with internet connections and used game fees etc... its just one big nightmare of a headache. But hey, as long as Microsoft can produce and stream new/exclusive TV shows like "Halo: The TV Series" by Steven Spielberg through Xbox Live Gold Membership (similar to what Netflix is doing with the new season of Arrested Development) all is good right? :tired: Microsoft has dug themselves one serious ditch. They are going to have to bring their A game to E3 with concrete system info: cost, release date, step by step explanation of used game fee (concerning how the transfer of game rights will work, how it will effect borrowing/rentals, etc.), how the system works with cable/satellite services. Even then, I don't think that many gamers will be touting that Xbox One as a definite winner this generation. "Xbox Won" alright. :suspicion:

Sony has gone on record as saying that the PS4 will play used games and that they would never think of completely blocking used games. At face value this sounds reassuring, but upon closer inspection the statement does leave a lot of ambiguity for broad interpretation. Could mean used games will be treated as they always have been for all previous console generations. Then again it could mean a similar situation as the Xbox One (technically the used game isn't completely blocked, its only blocked till you pay an added fee). This patent taken out by Sony not to long ago (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2013/0007892.html) would suggest the Xbox One scenario. Hopefully more clarification comes at E3 in about three weeks. Suddenly Wii U, even with all its faults, isn't looking so bad.

I own the Wii u. It's a fine system. Lego city is an incredible experience. Nintendoland is a great party game. Zombie u is a worthy addition to true survival horror. The battery on the pad sucks. And the loud up of lego city levels is admittedly extremely long. Other than that the Wii u has lived up to what I want from a game system.

Now that the virtual console is cranking out the older games, the pads ability to allow you to play while others watch tv is very cool. the Emphasis is on the gaming experience.

I really don't get the novelty of the Xbox one. A smart tv does damn near everything that Microsoft is claiming only they had the vision to provide. By the time it launches, smart TVs would have been out for two years. I own a vizio 3d smart tv. So I already have the multimedia experience. The lockout of borrowed or used or secondhand games and their stance on independent gaming is just greed. I skipped the Xbox360 because I wasn't real impressed with the first Xbox. The red ring failure is all the evidence you need that Microsoft really couldn't give a fig about the consumer nor can they bothered with shoving whatever they want down our throats. I'll stick with Wii u. You guys can spend your money on the TiVo clone.

Lord Malakite
05-26-2013, 10:32 AM
Some more fuel for the Xbox One fire. Microsoft took out a patent for DRM (Digital rights management) functions (http://www.vg247.com/2013/05/24/xbox-one-kinect-2s-visual-drm-functions-found-in-patent-file-report/) on the Xbox One's Kinect 2. Long story short, if Microsoft follows through (which several insiders suggest they already have) the Kinect will monitor the number of people that are watching the movie or game at one time. If that number exceeds the amount allowed on a game or film’s license, then the owner of the content must pay a fee for an extended license.

Darth Metalmute
05-26-2013, 10:31 PM
I guess its a good thing you don't have to buy the Kinect then...
If you buy the Xbox One at all...

Lord Malakite
05-27-2013, 09:38 AM
I guess its a good thing you don't have to buy the Kinect then...
Technically you do/are if you get the Xbox One. The new Kinect is included with the Xbox One (the console won't work without it). As if people weren't already upset/paranoid enough about the new Kinect's camera/microphone being "always on".

Lord Malakite
06-20-2013, 06:01 PM
Some good news to finally report on the Xbox One (http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/xbox-one-will-revise-controversial-games-plan/0117369). After the backlash that followed the system's reveal and later appearance at E3 Microsoft has come to their senses. The online requirement every 24 hours and the new used game restrictions are dead. After a one time only mandatory internet connection (for the initial setup) the system will not ever require an online connection. Rentals, borrowing and selling used games will work exactly like it does now for the Xbox 360 and all other prior video game systems. There are a few minor hindrances from this 180 turnaround (due to piracy prevention measures), but they aren't that big of an issue since its kind of already something we deal with for the Xbox 360. Games purchased on physical discs will still be saved/played directly on the console's hard drive, but now game discs will be required to be in the console while playing the game (to authenticate you own the game you are playing). Download bought games will not be trade-able/resell-able as they previously would of been under the old Xbox One business model. Also, the sharing option for your purchased games (physical disc or download) with up to 10 family/friend members via online is out.

JediTricks
06-24-2013, 10:03 PM
Now people are complaining that the change of heart means no sharing digital games. Ha! Sucks to be Microsoft, cannot win with these folks. For me, the Kinect 2 always open still freaks me out, and paying to use online is a dealbreaker.

I just don't see the appeal of it over the PS4, which is a hundred bucks less and runs a similar CPU and RAM and doesn't require monstrous HD installs.

Darth Metalmute
06-26-2013, 03:02 PM
Now people are complaining that the change of heart means no sharing digital games. Ha! Sucks to be Microsoft, cannot win with these folks. For me, the Kinect 2 always open still freaks me out, and paying to use online is a dealbreaker.

I just don't see the appeal of it over the PS4, which is a hundred bucks less and runs a similar CPU and RAM and doesn't require monstrous HD installs.


I think its the games. I would rather play XBox exclusives that Playstations. I've had my PS3 for over a year and just this week bought my first game for it.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
06-10-2014, 10:23 AM
All that came out of E3 for SW was this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yKv45X_OIo), in which the Dice team members talk about their passion for Star Wars: Battlefront. They went to the Lucasfilm archives and scanned the original props and models, and to the original shooting locations to capture their feeling, and I must say that the in-engine test footage looks absolutely stunning. Everything they've shown has been from the OT, but I hope there are still PT locations as well – I'm not holding my breath for Clone Wars or Rebels at this point, but that'd be cool too. There's still no release date set, and the trailer says we'll have to wait until Spring 2015 to see more. I'd rather they take the time to get it right, but I'm really looking forward to this.

JediTricks
06-13-2014, 01:22 AM
They mixed OT and PT in the previous Battlefront game, and it seemed a little odd for it, but whatever it takes to make this game work.