rokkerkory
Regular
Spencer on some more details around their approach for tomo: https://majornelson.com/podcast/601-catching-up-with-phil-spencer-before-e3-2017/
- Status
EA kind of demonstrated what i meant by highlighting differences with the madden Scorpio pic of clothing, only difference is that ms would do a side by side comparison.
but that's the level of detail i think ms should go down to no more, hardly any time spent on it, i think people think i mean actually cover it in more detail or mention technical details.
My view on the messaging from the conference is:
Xbox One family - Diverse games, few timed exclusives
1X - Plays them in 4k.
1S - Nothing
They went on about figures and number and stats which most have already been covered in the DF articles. This was them justifying the cost (regardless what it was)
The trouble for me is, without comparisons, I don't actually know how much better it actually looks compared to 1S much less 4pro.
Instead of all those stats, a couple blown up comparisons would have done wonders to show just what your getting. EA even went half way with Madden!
I know what the 1X can do and features it has, and they didn't even sell it to me, much less, the less informed. And you got to remember, the media will be writing up what they was shown as main focus, not all the features they know about.
All those stats, and no mention about 4k streaming & dvr, how much are capture cards that can do that alone?
Sell the features, sell what sets it apart, not just 4k game resolution. 4k would be shown off in every game that they showed in conference anyway.
I said that 1S had no messaging, but that was because they never compared the two. If they had they could've given good reasons for both.
I was prepared to pick it up at $499 price point, now even if it was $399 I'm not sure I would.
For the hardcore Xbox gamer with 4k TV's (and a subset of that even), I think it's fine. I don't think MS would've needed to do or say anything, as we all know it's going to play the X1 games the best and multi plats also, for everyone else that may have picked it up, I'm not so sure.
So as you can tell I was disappointed in the reveal, a real missed opportunity to say this is the 1X, these are it's features, and wow look at all the games.
This was it's first impression, regardless of any follow up videos or those daily e3 things they do.
Before hitting Post reply - I'm starting to wonder if I'm being harsh, and I watched it late at night or something which made me miss something, and I should re watch some of it. But doubt I will.
Xbox One family - Diverse games, few timed exclusives
1X - Plays them in 4k.
1S - Nothing
They went on about figures and number and stats which most have already been covered in the DF articles. This was them justifying the cost (regardless what it was)
The trouble for me is, without comparisons, I don't actually know how much better it actually looks compared to 1S much less 4pro.
Instead of all those stats, a couple blown up comparisons would have done wonders to show just what your getting. EA even went half way with Madden!
I know what the 1X can do and features it has, and they didn't even sell it to me, much less, the less informed. And you got to remember, the media will be writing up what they was shown as main focus, not all the features they know about.
All those stats, and no mention about 4k streaming & dvr, how much are capture cards that can do that alone?
Sell the features, sell what sets it apart, not just 4k game resolution. 4k would be shown off in every game that they showed in conference anyway.
I said that 1S had no messaging, but that was because they never compared the two. If they had they could've given good reasons for both.
I was prepared to pick it up at $499 price point, now even if it was $399 I'm not sure I would.
For the hardcore Xbox gamer with 4k TV's (and a subset of that even), I think it's fine. I don't think MS would've needed to do or say anything, as we all know it's going to play the X1 games the best and multi plats also, for everyone else that may have picked it up, I'm not so sure.
So as you can tell I was disappointed in the reveal, a real missed opportunity to say this is the 1X, these are it's features, and wow look at all the games.
This was it's first impression, regardless of any follow up videos or those daily e3 things they do.
Before hitting Post reply - I'm starting to wonder if I'm being harsh, and I watched it late at night or something which made me miss something, and I should re watch some of it. But doubt I will.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
One thing about the "messaging" that really bothered me was how they made sure to say the XboneX updates on existing games were "COMPLETELY FREE OF CHARGE".
Wait, so charging for game updates consisting of graphics improvements for the new console was actually on the table at some point?
Wait, so charging for game updates consisting of graphics improvements for the new console was actually on the table at some point?
I don't think so. I think it was just them being proactive and answering a question before it was asked.
It probably helps as I'm sure their would be people wondering if there was an upgrade costs.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I have no problems with their messaging, because they did exactly as I presumed they would.
They began with the XB1X and then showed every game on the XB1X while saying that the games also play on the XB1S. The fact that the XB1S experience would be downgraded was assumed, taken for granted, and there was no need for comparison shots that would show how much better the XB1X was to the XB1S. The consumer knows the $500 console will run games better than the $250 console.
They began with the XB1X and then showed every game on the XB1X while saying that the games also play on the XB1S. The fact that the XB1S experience would be downgraded was assumed, taken for granted, and there was no need for comparison shots that would show how much better the XB1X was to the XB1S. The consumer knows the $500 console will run games better than the $250 console.
obviously that's good for you.
but i don't know how much better they look, same way if i see a review of a game i don't know how much better it looks if they only show pc, or console, but i guess that's why they put comparison shots and vids in.
why did they go over all the specs, and more? Pretty sure most people know.
now we have to wait for DF or someone to release the most basic comparison which they could've done instead of talking about specs people know or care little about after year of hearing it.
comparing is about saying entry model you get x, premium y. Pretty standard thing to do.
it will happen, just wasted chance to get the features out first and foremost.
apart from that, the games, games, games was what i hoped, but not expected as it's a change from previous shows for them. Especially well done on expecting that, that was a very pleasant surprise for me.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Why? Did they do a comparison of Gears on XB1S vs PC?
Yeah, in a way that's possibly shooting themselves in the foot as if they don't show how much better XB1X is, they aren't convincing their existing owners. But then showing comparative games would have been to highlight the inadequacies of their old machine, as it were, which isn't good PR either. So probably best to keep it as was, showing on the new platform and leave the longer term E3 show and trailers and reviews to cover the differences.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
I don't see a market for the XB1X outside of existing owners, do you?
Why wouldn't PS4 owners who play 3rd party titles not consider it for the same games but even better. True, market might be small but there was significant amount that humped ship from 360 to PS4. Should be possible in the reverse.
Tommy McClain
Rikimaru
Veteran
Sony now has almost all 3rd party partnerships. Like Destiny deal.
Yeah I could see that having an effect for multiplayer heavy titles. Will be interesting to see how much of an effect though.
Tommy McClain
AKA Gillette the best a man can get strategy, (the reason why I never buy their razors on principal)
what's with Bungie now? I've never been into Destiny, but this is getting out of hand if this is true -Call of Duty might be next?-.
This sounds like Fifa International Soccer for the Megadrive vs SNES version (16Mb vs 8Mb). Or the rivalry Megadrive vs SNES with games like Aladdin, where Megadrive version used more memory and had more animations.
http://gametransfers.com/destiny-2-...ed-only-on-ps4-pro-no-promise-for-xbox-one-x/
Last edited:
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Cash? I assume that's what is 'with' Bungie. Not to mention there may be an organizational culture of 'stick it to MS' because they feel they were treated unfairly, etc.. (pure speculation on my part, but a possibility).
Personally, I don't care. It's not just that I wasn't impressed with the Destiny demo, it's across the board. I don't care if Sony does the same thing to CoD, either. Of course, that's another game I don't play....
I think the only thing that really matters is if the deals are announced prior to purchasing decisions, and it seems to me that they are. If Destiny/CoD/Spiderman/Arkum/etc. are important to you, buy the Sony product.
I fully support Sony's rights to spend money buying exclusivity or higher performance. Just as I fully support MS's rights to spend money doing whatever they want to do to get people to try to buy their console instead or in addition too. Would it be more or less fair if MS had decided to put Zen in the XB1X and eat the cost, still selling the vastly more capable console at the same $499 price tag? They didn't choose to do that, or invest in similar 3rd party exclusivity or invest in 1st party AAA development.
Personally, I don't care. It's not just that I wasn't impressed with the Destiny demo, it's across the board. I don't care if Sony does the same thing to CoD, either. Of course, that's another game I don't play....
I think the only thing that really matters is if the deals are announced prior to purchasing decisions, and it seems to me that they are. If Destiny/CoD/Spiderman/Arkum/etc. are important to you, buy the Sony product.
I fully support Sony's rights to spend money buying exclusivity or higher performance. Just as I fully support MS's rights to spend money doing whatever they want to do to get people to try to buy their console instead or in addition too. Would it be more or less fair if MS had decided to put Zen in the XB1X and eat the cost, still selling the vastly more capable console at the same $499 price tag? They didn't choose to do that, or invest in similar 3rd party exclusivity or invest in 1st party AAA development.
What is wrong? They have a 3rd party deal, just like every other AAA game which has a deal with MS or Sony.
- Status