I'm assuming some reasonable level of flash storage in the device, but yes, that part struck me as a bit odd since even then you couldn't DVR much.
Cost is presumably a huge concern if we assume the Digital Foundry rumor is correct.
Though, I imagine that DVR doesn't make Microsoft money, so they would be willing to dump it.
Does digital foundry have any fundamental history of being right on anything like this in the past? Because some of the lacking hardware bits and strange tech pieces is just looking almost laughable. I would love to see them take on Google and Apple but they would actually...have to have a product that does something first, and additional purchasing factors would be ever better.
I'm viewing Digital Foundry as a subset of Eurogamer's sources, which have a pretty solid record, since the two often run each other's rumors and articles.
I don't see gaming as the in. Kinect service is the in. Beyond gaming the primary purpose is to provide an 'advanced natural user interface.'MS has an "in" with gaming, but then they'd be competing directly with their own products..
Perhaps the rumor that the next Xbox has Kinect 2 built in is actually in reverse?
It's pretty easy to image MS building Kinect 2 to contain all the necessary components within a single device. There would be no set-top 'box', just the upgraded Kinect 2, with storage & processing on board.
Consumers simply purchase Kinect 2 as a stand-alone product & plug it into the TV + WiFi.
Enabling whatever services MS wants to push through it.
But it's not going to be a gaming device. It's an IPTV set-top box with a voice/motion controlled UI. It will most likely require Wifi to be of much use, but that's not really an issue in most households today.There's a big reason why this can't happen. A casual device like the one mentioned would either require a: an internet connection as in download only or b: a completely splintered off brand and shelf space in stores for these small games. Although the hardcore has embraced live and arcade, take say Wii's audience and I'd be willing to bet a very small fraction of the base downloads games or is connected to the internet.
Shrinking down the current 360 even further ala psone pstwo makes more sense. Same brand, same shelf space but the system itself will be transitioned to a more casual box but still have access for the latecomers and budget gamers.
I don't see gaming as the in. Kinect service is the in. Beyond gaming the primary purpose is to provide an 'advanced natural user interface.'
The television market right now very closely resembles the cell phone market pre-iPhone. My newest TV and Blu-Ray player (different companies) are both connected to the internet. They try to offer a variety of apps and services, but accessing them through the traditional remote can be a chore. TV companies want (need?) to get rid of the onscreen keyboard before Apple does.
Again it would still require some type of connection to a provider of some sort. They aren't going to release a device like this and be able to sell games in stores for it. The device as described would be psp go all over again in console form unless they have a partnership with ATT, Verizon, time warner or something. If the hardcore wasn't ready for it the casuals sure as hell aren't. No way. Loop is a shrunken 360 w kinect standard. All other 360 models will be phased out and the hardcore will have the next box. I'm sure they could even throw in an ARM processor to the 360 loop for whatever windows 8 stuff they wanna do.But it's not going to be a gaming device. It's an IPTV set-top box with a voice/motion controlled UI. It will most likely require Wifi to be of much use, but that's not really an issue in most households today.
Downloadable games will be one feature, but not the main driver. It probably would make sense for it to be XBLA compatible, and have all platforms be able to tap into a unified marketplace.
You're still hung up on the assumption that it's a game console. It's not a game console, it's a Microsoft product that happens to share some technologies with their game console. Microsoft does not need to sell packaged games for it, any more than Sony needs to be able to sell PS3 games for their TVs or Blu-ray players.Again it would still require some type of connection to a provider of some sort. They aren't going to release a device like this and be able to sell games in stores for it. The device as described would be psp go all over again in console form unless they have a partnership with ATT, Verizon, time warner or something. If the hardcore wasn't ready for it the casuals sure as hell aren't. No way. Loop is a shrunken 360 w kinect standard. All other 360 models will be phased out and the hardcore will have the next box. I'm sure they could even throw in an ARM processor to the 360 loop for whatever windows 8 stuff they wanna do.
Arcade can be cross platform in this case. The highest spec game on loop can play and sell on xbox 3 just the same. Think apple or android market.My question is this, what about developers? You wanna fragment them between two entirely different consoles? You'd have to make a decision of which sku to develop for, and in the end it would still end up being only a fraction of what the potential userbase would be if it were a unified ecosystem.
IDK, i could be completely wrong, but if this rumor end up being true it will be a very interesting next gen indeed, though the potential for disaster is high.
Not hung up on it. There's just no market for such a device. Remember nuon? That's what you guys are describing but with internet connectivity. Microsoft would have more success partnering with a tv manufacturer and building this into all of their sets than having a standalone box.You're still hung up on the assumption that it's a game console. It's not a game console, it's a Microsoft product that happens to share some technologies with their game console. Microsoft does not need to sell packaged games for it, any more than Sony needs to be able to sell PS3 games for their TVs or Blu-ray players.
I thought the idea of Microsoft teaming up with all of these cable companies was the plan of implementing the 360 (or this KinecTV) as the new standard cable box. Maybe I was wrong about that...I'm assuming some reasonable level of flash storage in the device, but yes, that part struck me as a bit odd since even then you couldn't DVR much.
Cost is presumably a huge concern if we assume the Digital Foundry rumor is correct.
Though, I imagine that DVR doesn't make Microsoft money, so they would be willing to dump it.
Arcade can be cross platform in this case. The highest spec game on loop can play and sell on xbox 3 just the same. Think apple or android market.
It remains to be seen whether there is a market for it.Not hung up on it. There's just no market for such a device. Remember nuon? That's what you guys are describing but with internet connectivity. Microsoft would have more success partnering with a tv manufacturer and building this into all of their sets than having a standalone box.
We'll have to see how well Kinect 2 performs. So far, they haven't been able to achieve this with the original Kinect (though it is selling well).
But if MS wants to set the new standard for television interface and control using Kinect, they're going to have to get it to the point where it's completely unobtrusive and can be used as mindlessly as a remote.
If they do this, it would be the most retarded move ever. Remember Sega with the 32X, Sega CD and Saturn all together? That's a bit like how messy this situation will be, supporting two full fledged systems at once.
Yeah. I'm in the beta. Dont like it much. Again I'd bank on this being built into a tv set if it's not a 360 based device. Either that or someone else had the idea that the standalone device is actually kinect 2 (built in ARM, WiFi, connects right to tv and then ALSO connects to the xbox3. Even that makes more sense than some totally independent box.It remains to be seen whether there is a market for it.
Have you tried the new 360 dashboard UI? With 3-4 voice commands, you can be streaming the movie/TV show of your choice. Waaay faster and easier than any remote control or keyboard interface. Voice control is really a very compelling interface for TV.
Eventually the tech could very well be integrated into TV sets. But it's obviously much easier for the hundreds of millions of current HDTV owners to buy a $100-200 box than replace their TVs.
I agree with everything except I would flip the release dates.
Set-Top - 2013
Xbox3 - 2012
Perhaps the rumor that the next Xbox has Kinect 2 built in is actually in reverse?
It's pretty easy to image MS building Kinect 2 to contain all the necessary components within a single device. There would be no set-top 'box', just the upgraded Kinect 2, with storage & processing on board.
Consumers simply purchase Kinect 2 as a stand-alone product & plug it into the TV + WiFi.
Enabling whatever services MS wants to push through it.
Cliffy B said:I think hardcore gamers are terrified by it, to the point where they get fiercely defensive.
[...]
I want to play Skyrim and cast my spells using my hand or maybe occasionally doing some other strategy things in other types of games using hand gestures or voice and do an integrated Kinect experience that has both, that's the thing that excites me the most.
I think this strategy can work if they're not BOTH called Xbox. For example
Microsoft Kinect TV in 2012
Microsoft XBox *insert number/moniker here* in 2013/14
No more confusion.
Would Microsoft want to cannibalize itself with drastically different SKUs?
It already has. Netflix has been the most popular 'game' on my friend list for years now. A true divide between set-top box, which is what they're moving towards with the new dash, and the console makes sense.
The problem is: Will Ms clearly and immediately state that the first product to launch (the set-top box) is not the new console? Will they just come out and say "are you a core gamer? Then wait another year"?
I mean, with Wii U and maybe a new Sony console round the (2012-13) corner, how can Ms convince people to wait?
I certainly wouldn't mind, but people buying a single console, could just jump on the Wii U/PS4 wagon.
This is what I don't get. Already we occasionally see Kinect+360 going for $200. What would the "Xbox Set Top Box" be able to do that a new X360 SKU couldn't, that would make it worth losing compatibility with its sibling devices and splitting the market?This is what I don't get - the 360 is already at $199 and nearing the $99 price point. Why not use that as the low-cost entry vehicle?
Even if it's true that "The current Kinect is hamstrung by having to pass data to the Xbox 360 through ageing USB technology", wouldn't a modified 360 still be a simpler solution than making something completely different that would lose the ability to play 360 games or have its games played on the next major Xbox? Like when Nintendo wanted to throw a camera onto the DS they made the DSi, but not something that stood completely apart from the DS line.Presumably because it's not compatible with the Kinect 2: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=453520
The problem is: Will Ms clearly and immediately state that the first product to launch (the set-top box) is not the new console? Will they just come out and say "are you a core gamer? Then wait another year"?
I mean, with Wii U and maybe a new Sony console round the (2012-13) corner, how can Ms convince people to wait?
I certainly wouldn't mind, but people buying a single console, could just jump on the Wii U/PS4 wagon.
That's crazy talk.
Nintendo is about to learn the lesson that's plagued cable television providers since the 90s. Casuals absolutely hate to upgrade anything that they view as still being perfectly functional. Apple may get away with it because they've been able to successfully position their products as hipster cred/status symbols, but no way is MS going to be able to convince people to update a glorified TiVo every two years.
I suspect most people who buy it will buy it once and hold on to it until it breaks.[b/]
This is what I don't get. Already we occasionally see Kinect+360 going for $200. What would the "Xbox Set Top Box" be able to do that a new X360 SKU couldn't, that would make it worth losing compatibility with its sibling devices and splitting the market?