Xbox 720 Reveal

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

As for taking a cut, I'm not sure why people are surprised.

 

I don't think many of us are that surprised, but I think many will be dismayed. Access to digital entertainment content is becoming increasingly onerous and the balance is tilting in favour of the producer, not consumer. Why not tie the product to disc? Why kill the used games market? How will the value of a used title be determined?

 

All of these things should be determined by the wider industry (retail, customers, the market) not one key player with a vested interest.

 

I'm not buying this, so I'm relaxed about it. But people with kids who want a console (like mine does) will probably start voting with their feet once they work out that they cannot pick-up older, used titles at reasonable prices.

[alanschu]

 

 

I don't think many of us are that surprised, but I think many will be dismayed. Access to digital entertainment content is becoming increasingly onerous and the balance is tilting in favour of the producer, not consumer. Why not tie the product to disc? Why kill the used games market? How will the value of a used title be determined?

 

It entirely depends on what they mean by "You will be able to trade and sell your Xbox games online."

 

 

MS looks to be pushing heavily into digital, and have effectively resorted physical media to be simply a delivery device, not what is necessary to play the game.  I'm curious if people are still as upset if they can do the things they want, but digitially.  Want to lend a game to a friend, "trade" it with him for free (or some game you want to play).  Licenses are swapped and people have access to the other game.

 

It sounds like you just won't be able to lend with physical media anymore.

[AwesomeOcelot]

I don't have much sympathy for second hand buyers or the retailers, it's no better than piracy, it gives the publisher the same amount of money. I've bought some games second hand that were not on sale any more. The sad thing is that this would introduce DRM, and there are reports of a daily login that's unacceptable to me. Seems like a stupid system to me, the disc itself is pretty cheap to manufacture, there's no reason why the Xbox One couldn't have a register on purchase system like Steam with an offline mode.

[pmp10]

I don't have much sympathy for second hand buyers or the retailers, it's no better than piracy, it gives the publisher the same amount of money. I've bought some games second hand that were not on sale any more. The sad thing is that this would introduce DRM, and there are reports of a daily login that's unacceptable to me. Seems like a stupid system to me, the disc itself is pretty cheap to manufacture, there's no reason why the Xbox One couldn't have a register on purchase system like Steam with an offline mode.

The chief aim of always-online is fighting piracy.

Otherwise MS would be perfectly happy with one time activation.

[Monte Carlo]

It will be interesting to see how Sony responds with PS4 to this.

[alanschu]

Register on purpose?  Like a CD-Key?

 

 

Part of what I find particularly fascinating is that console players are slowly moving to an even playing field with PC.  I haven't been able to sell a used PC game for over a decade (since people abused it like mad), although I'm sure some places still bought used games.

 

It didn't explode the PC gaming scene when such things were no longer common place, so I am not convinced that this is some fatal flaw that will ultimately undermine all of console gaming.  I suppose it might, but we'll see I suppose.

[Monte Carlo]

Alan I think the issue might be that more kids play on consoles than PC. TBH as an adult I couldn't care less about used games. It doesn't affect my gaming. But kids OTOH are managing allowances etc and its very important to them. And as a parent I don't want to spend more or less full-price for console games all the time.

[alanschu]

More kids may play on console, but I think the association that console gamers are kids is no longer correct.

 

Kids are also going to be the ones that grow up "not knowing any better" (i.e. new kids that start gaming will live in a world where the Xbox One was their first console).

 

 

Another thing to consider is that there is a chance that, with developers getting support via the used game transactions and the like, it may be a developer preferred platform.  Depends on what Sony's tools are like too, however.

[entrerix]

Register on purpose?  Like a CD-Key?

 

 

Part of what I find particularly fascinating is that console players are slowly moving to an even playing field with PC.  I haven't been able to sell a used PC game for over a decade (since people abused it like mad), although I'm sure some places still bought used games.

 

It didn't explode the PC gaming scene when such things were no longer common place, so I am not convinced that this is some fatal flaw that will ultimately undermine all of console gaming.  I suppose it might, but we'll see I suppose.

 

 

to me, the always online requirements are more of a deal breaker than the no-used games thing.  yeah on pc we don't have used games, but we also don't have a requirement that all games be always online.  some games are, like diablo 3.  but most aren't, and of those few that are, i don't usually buy them because i dont like always-online requirements on my games.

[Lexx]

TBH, I wouldn't care about all of this, if console games wouldn't be so extremely expensive in the first place. A new game for 60 to 70 euro or something along the line... It's madness. I have never bought a pc game for such a price. It's especially madness, considering how fast you are playing through games nowadays and then most likely never touch them again for a long time...

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

I don't think many of us are that surprised, but I think many will be dismayed. Access to digital entertainment content is becoming increasingly onerous and the balance is tilting in favour of the producer, not consumer. Why not tie the product to disc? Why kill the used games market? How will the value of a used title be determined?

 

It entirely depends on what they mean by "You will be able to trade and sell your Xbox games online."

 

 

MS looks to be pushing heavily into digital, and have effectively resorted physical media to be simply a delivery device, not what is necessary to play the game.  I'm curious if people are still as upset if they can do the things they want, but digitially.  Want to lend a game to a friend, "trade" it with him for free (or some game you want to play).  Licenses are swapped and people have access to the other game.

 

It sounds like you just won't be able to lend with physical media anymore.

 

 

But if it works that way then you can theoretically go back and forth between your entire collections and play all his games for free and then exchange everything back to what it was.

 

A dozen people would buy one game that way and play twelve.

 

I don't think that's going to happen.

[Morgoth]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-05-24-microsoft-applies-for-patent-on-tv-achievements

 

 

 

 

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED: 10 PIZZA HUT COMMERCIALS VIEWED

[entrerix]

its like microsoft heard about that whole "gamification" of life thing from 5 years ago and decided "omg that totally IS the future!!!1!!"

 

not realizing of course that they are a retard factory

 

achievements for watching tv!  congratulations!  you watched it!

 

sat immobile for hours! level up!  you are now a tv viewer level 6, you earned a virtual hat for your virtual avatar who is depicted as being a watcher of television on a couch!

 

level up!

[alanschu]

 

 

to me, the always online requirements are more of a deal breaker than the no-used games thing.  yeah on pc we don't have used games, but we also don't have a requirement that all games be always online.  some games are, like diablo 3.  but most aren't, and of those few that are, i don't usually buy them because i dont like always-online requirements on my games.

 

The always online requirements are different than Diablo 3, though, and I think that that is still important.

 

It's fine if you think that authenticating once per day is too draconian for you, but I think a lot of the intense reaction is in part motivated by the fact that many people may not.  For all the hoopla a game like Diablo III received (or even SimCity), both games were still quite successfull (Diablo III likely absurdly so).  It's not like either game hid the fact that online connections were required.

 

For myself, the online check in for the 360 is definitely not a deal breaker.  What will prevent me from buying it is the usual "I'm not really a console gamer."  If I were to buy it, however, some of the extra features are things that I would still consider too.  I actually almost bought a PS3 because it doubled as a bluray player, but ultimately passed on the console entirely when I examined how much I actually sit at home and watch movies.  The primary reason I have a 360 is because my friends and I often enjoyed games of Rock Band, though I have bought other games since then because I do have the console.

[alanschu]

TBH, I wouldn't care about all of this, if console games wouldn't be so extremely expensive in the first place. A new game for 60 to 70 euro or something along the line... It's madness. I have never bought a pc game for such a price. It's especially madness, considering how fast you are playing through games nowadays and then most likely never touch them again for a long time...

 

For myself, PC games and console games are typically the same price today ($60).

 

Having said that, games inevitably come down in price.  Is waiting not an option?

[Calax]

More kids may play on console, but I think the association that console gamers are kids is no longer correct.

 

Kids are also going to be the ones that grow up "not knowing any better" (i.e. new kids that start gaming will live in a world where the Xbox One was their first console).

 

 

Another thing to consider is that there is a chance that, with developers getting support via the used game transactions and the like, it may be a developer preferred platform.  Depends on what Sony's tools are like too, however.

From a developers perspective, yeah this might be a good thing, and they might prefer the new system over the PS4 (assuming the PS4 isn't going the same route), but ultimately the consumer is the king. If/when microsoft fails miserably in this competition, it seems like the developers are gonna get a shock in that the consumer isn't just following their path like an sheep.

 

Developers may like it because they get more money, but customers will hate it because they get less. Why would I sell/trade my used game for cheap when it's gonna be price controlled by Microsoft/the company. I'm not gonna be able to play the market (a bit) and sell my used game right before the next one comes out (when the price peaks). And if I sell my game on their market, I'll get a tiny cut of what is my property because part of that sale is turned around and given to the publisher and developer. Retail companies can absorb that becuase they move hundreds of thousands of units a day, but little Timmy will get 2.50 when he sold the game for 12 dollars, because Microsoft and the Developer and Publisher each got their cut. And while Gamestop may be disliked for their prices, they currently give you more value than MS would allow to be given to the consumers (presumably if they're taking their cuts).

 

One of the reasons Steam has been successful as heck is their Summer/Winter sales where they post a good portion of their library on sale for 50-60% off. It gave them a lot of support, and most computers are online. A lot of your computer REQUIRES being online to operate, while most of your consoles do not. And even if your computer is unhooked, you can still play older games (and quite a few new games) offline.

 

Basically people are decrying the fact that A) their system has to be hooked in to the internet to even operate (which not even my PC requires) B) Microsoft and publishers will be able to control the price of every game they ever produce (meaning that the "free market" is dead) and C) They'll have a camera on us at all times weather we like it or not.

[alanschu]

From a developers perspective, yeah this might be a good thing, and they might prefer the new system over the PS4 (assuming the PS4 isn't going the same route), but ultimately the consumer is the king. If/when microsoft fails miserably in this competition, it seems like the developers are gonna get a shock in that the consumer isn't just following their path like an sheep.

 

You're right, what consumers are playing will have a huge impact.

 

As for your "it seems like the developers" jab, at this point I'm not even sure what you're talking about.  I figured it didn't need explaining that my statement was along the lines of "all else being equal."  If PS4 has 80% marketshare, then yeah the PS4 is going to be the platform people develop for.

 

 

 

Basically people are decrying the fact that A) their system has to be hooked in to the internet to even operate (which not even my PC requires) B) Microsoft and publishers will be able to control the price of every game they ever produce (meaning that the "free market" is dead) and C) They'll have a camera on us at all times weather we like it or not.

 

A) So basically people are being babies?  No one is forcing them to buy the damn system.  So why the outrage?  Or is it because there's a fear that other people might not give a crap so those people end up losing (at which point, it's market forces.  Sorry).

 

I mean, we already have people going "What, I can't sell used games!?"  Except that it sounds like you can, it just has to be done online.  You can even trade your games online with your friends.

 

B) It hasn't affected PC gaming, and it's not going to signal any collapse for console gaming either.  Sorry.  Steam has often been seen as the saviour of PC gaming.

 

C) Really?  I know that the microphone will be on, and available to respond to "Xbox on."  Does this mean that the camera is always on too (I'll need to see a link)?  I have seen mountains of people equate this to big brother is always watching, but given people's penchant for fear mongering and excessive use of hyperbole?  The microphone is on.  The clapper is always listening for my claps... I guess it was a giant invasion of privacy as well.  Or any voice activated... anything.  From Polygon:

 

The Xbox One's Kinect microphone is always listening and waiting for specific commands, Microsoft's hardware program manager John Link told Polygon today.

Microsoft revealed today that Xbox One will support commands native commands for powering the console on and off. Xbox 360 Kinect users can power off the console by using voice commands to navigate the menus, but not power on their consoles with the device.

In response to a question about whether that functionality means that Kinect is always on, Link said that Kinect is always listening, but in a limited capacity. It also helps ensure developers can count on the peripheral, he said.

 

 

I don't see anything about the camera always watching you.

 

 

Yeah, Microsoft is banking on the game system requiring online.  If that's a deal breaker for people, then it'd sure as heck be awesome for those people to acknowledge this in a less "frothing at the mouth" way.  It does nothing positive for the gaming community in general.

 

 

As for all the hypothetical situations people paint up:  logic does not mean reality.  You totally pull numbers out of your ass (Timmy only gets $2.50) because it paints things in a worse light and frankly, begins to wholly undermine your entire argument because it's no longer based on fact.  Now you're just fear mongering like everyone else, imagining worst case scenarios that have no foundation in what has been mentioned because, near as I can tell, bananas.

 

 

 

Developers may like it because they get more money, but customers will hate it because they get less. Why would I sell/trade my used game for cheap when it's gonna be price controlled by Microsoft/the company.

 

This is a complete mental fabrication that has no bearing with what we know.  There's not a hint of "price control" in the online used market that their discussing.  In fact, the link I pointed out straight up stated the you can openly trade games.  Hard to take a cut from $0 transactions. 

 

 

 

 

I'm not gonna be able to play the market (a bit) and sell my used game right before the next one comes out (when the price peaks).

 

Why not?  Because you imagine it so?

 

 

 

And if I sell my game on their market, I'll get a tiny cut of what is my property because part of that sale is turned around and given to the publisher and developer.

 

I'm sorry, how big is this cut again?  You seem to have pulled it out of thin air.

 

 

 

 

Retail companies can absorb that becuase they move hundreds of thousands of units a day, but little Timmy will get 2.50 when he sold the game for 12 dollars, because Microsoft and the Developer and Publisher each got their cut. And while Gamestop may be disliked for their prices, they currently give you more value than MS would allow to be given to the consumers (presumably if they're taking their cuts).

 

Exactly, Microsoft could easily absorb taking a very small cut, because they'd be dealing with volume.  Given we don't have any idea what any supposed cut would be, you're doing nothing more than fear mongering at this point, and it's the type of thing that frustrates the hell out of me.

 

Unless something new has come out in the past day, you have zero visibility on the bolded.  If gamers are able to choose what they sell their game at, they are not bound by Gamestop's prices and can sell it for whatever they want.  This means that the market could very well have the used game price point set at a level where, even after a cut from Microsoft, end users still make more money than they would selling to Gamestop.

 

From the article I linked (emphasis mine):

 

 

The Xbox exec wouldn't give further details on how this system will work, but we're assuming that once you're done with a game, you can trade the code online and it will be erased from your machine. But what will you get? Other games? Microsoft Points?

No matter how the final system works, it is not likely to please GameStop, the world's biggest buyer and seller of used video games, but it could be a tantalizing way to share games with your friends in the virtual space.

 

We don't have the details to make the claims that you're making.  You're making up numbers and spreading misinformation.  This isn't productive.

 

 

On a final note, if it's possible to trade games digitally, the Xbox One would allow me to do something I've never been able to do before: easily lend a game to Calax.

Edited May 24, 2013 by alanschu

[pmp10]

 

TBH, I wouldn't care about all of this, if console games wouldn't be so extremely expensive in the first place. A new game for 60 to 70 euro or something along the line... It's madness. I have never bought a pc game for such a price. It's especially madness, considering how fast you are playing through games nowadays and then most likely never touch them again for a long time...

 

For myself, PC games and console games are typically the same price today ($60).

 

Having said that, games inevitably come down in price.  Is waiting not an option?

 

The problem is that most console games comes down in price due to sales of used games providing competition.

I'm not sure if the incentive to drop prices will still be there.

[babaganoosh13]

I wonder if they'll do "Trade in X number of licenses to get a new release" like what Gamestop does.

[AwesomeOcelot]

 

 

TBH, I wouldn't care about all of this, if console games wouldn't be so extremely expensive in the first place. A new game for 60 to 70 euro or something along the line... It's madness. I have never bought a pc game for such a price. It's especially madness, considering how fast you are playing through games nowadays and then most likely never touch them again for a long time...

 

For myself, PC games and console games are typically the same price today ($60).

 

Having said that, games inevitably come down in price.  Is waiting not an option?

 

The problem is that most console games comes down in price due to sales of used games providing competition.

I'm not sure if the incentive to drop prices will still be there.

 

PC games start cheaper and drop faster without second hand sales. Partly this is to do with much greater competition on the PC and no licensing fees.

[Calax]

 

From a developers perspective, yeah this might be a good thing, and they might prefer the new system over the PS4 (assuming the PS4 isn't going the same route), but ultimately the consumer is the king. If/when microsoft fails miserably in this competition, it seems like the developers are gonna get a shock in that the consumer isn't just following their path like an sheep.

 

You're right, what consumers are playing will have a huge impact.

 

As for your "it seems like the developers" jab, at this point I'm not even sure what you're talking about.  I figured it didn't need explaining that my statement was along the lines of "all else being equal."  If PS4 has 80% marketshare, then yeah the PS4 is going to be the platform people develop for.

 

My point about the devs (although it should be aimed more at the Publishers) is that there seems to be a culture of "You will take what we give you AND YOU WILL LIKE IT!" because they control their market so well. And if the Crowd decry's what they don't like, you get developers popping out saying almost exactly that.

http://kotaku.com/5892199/stop-thinking-youre-a-producer-former-mass-effect-designer-tells-gamers

 

And yes, there is indie games, but the problem is that they all deal in digital distribution, and have to be vetted by Sony, Valve, or Microsoft to be released, meaning that those indie titles must fit into the publishing model of the three companies.

 

 

 

Basically people are decrying the fact that A) their system has to be hooked in to the internet to even operate (which not even my PC requires) B) Microsoft and publishers will be able to control the price of every game they ever produce (meaning that the "free market" is dead) and C) They'll have a camera on us at all times weather we like it or not.

 

A) So basically people are being babies?  No one is forcing them to buy the damn system.  So why the outrage?  Or is it because there's a fear that other people might not give a crap so those people end up losing (at which point, it's market forces.  Sorry).

 

If I may

 

What happens when the system in question requires an online connection?

 

I mean, we already have people going "What, I can't sell used games!?"  Except that it sounds like you can, it just has to be done online.  You can even trade your games online with your friends.

 

B) It hasn't affected PC gaming, and it's not going to signal any collapse for console gaming either.  Sorry.  Steam has often been seen as the saviour of PC gaming.

IIRC way back when, PC games weren't swapped as much as console games. And like I mentioned, PC games don't all require an internet connection to actually play. Just for the install (if via steam), and beyond that things like Metro can be played entirely offline. Xbox's update means that people who may have to hit starbucks once or twice a month to get WiFi for their game downloads (yes these people exist) can't play their Xbox anymore. After all, a Laptop is far more portable than a Xbox and it's setup.

C) Really?  I know that the microphone will be on, and available to respond to "Xbox on."  Does this mean that the camera is always on too (I'll need to see a link)?  I have seen mountains of people equate this to big brother is always watching, but given people's penchant for fear mongering and excessive use of hyperbole?  The microphone is on.  The clapper is always listening for my claps... I guess it was a giant invasion of privacy as well.  Or any voice activated... anything.  From Polygon:

 

The Xbox One's Kinect microphone is always listening and waiting for specific commands, Microsoft's hardware program manager John Link told Polygon today.

Microsoft revealed today that Xbox One will support commands native commands for powering the console on and off. Xbox 360 Kinect users can power off the console by using voice commands to navigate the menus, but not power on their consoles with the device.

In response to a question about whether that functionality means that Kinect is always on, Link said that Kinect is always listening, but in a limited capacity. It also helps ensure developers can count on the peripheral, he said.

 

 

I don't see anything about the camera always watching you.

 

 

Yeah, Microsoft is banking on the game system requiring online.  If that's a deal breaker for people, then it'd sure as heck be awesome for those people to acknowledge this in a less "frothing at the mouth" way.  It does nothing positive for the gaming community in general.

But it's the only way people think they get heard. It's the same thing with politics, only the fringe groups get seen (or are perceived to be the only groups seen). I've never honestly seen a developer of a non-MMO get into a discussion with fans over systems design or mechanics of a game, instead it's always a one way street with the developers sending a trail of "We Want's" without the players being able to go "Well what about?". And if anyone does ask questions, it's always a member of the gaming media who softball it because of the nature of the relationship between them.

 

I realize that fans being "back seat developers" is not something that's wanted, but it would be nice if devs might actually listen to something other than game reviews and publishers about what the fans actually want. Fans don't want an Xbox that does their bloody laundry and watches them (yes I embellished about always on, but with a camera pointed at you that doesn't have an indicator of when it's on or not is not something I want). Fans don't want an Xbox that's trying to Gameify watching tv, fans don't want an xbox that's "transforming their television experience". Fans want a box that they hit a button and can play Halo on, without having to make sure that the box is hooked up to the internet.

 

As for all the hypothetical situations people paint up:  logic does not mean reality.  You totally pull numbers out of your ass (Timmy only gets $2.50) because it paints things in a worse light and frankly, begins to wholly undermine your entire argument because it's no longer based on fact.  Now you're just fear mongering like everyone else, imagining worst case scenarios that have no foundation in what has been mentioned because, near as I can tell, bananas.

Actually, I was looking at this:

 

 

 

Developers may like it because they get more money, but customers will hate it because they get less. Why would I sell/trade my used game for cheap when it's gonna be price controlled by Microsoft/the company.

 

This is a complete mental fabrication that has no bearing with what we know.  There's not a hint of "price control" in the online used market that their discussing.  In fact, the link I pointed out straight up stated the you can openly trade games.  Hard to take a cut from $0 transactions.

 

I'm sorry, how big is this cut again?  You seem to have pulled it out of thin air.

 

  

Retail companies can absorb that becuase they move hundreds of thousands of units a day, but little Timmy will get 2.50 when he sold the game for 12 dollars, because Microsoft and the Developer and Publisher each got their cut. And while Gamestop may be disliked for their prices, they currently give you more value than MS would allow to be given to the consumers (presumably if they're taking their cuts).

 

Exactly, Microsoft could easily absorb taking a very small cut, because they'd be dealing with volume.  Given we don't have any idea what any supposed cut would be, you're doing nothing more than fear mongering at this point, and it's the type of thing that frustrates the hell out of me.

 

Unless something new has come out in the past day, you have zero visibility on the bolded.  If gamers are able to choose what they sell their game at, they are not bound by Gamestop's prices and can sell it for whatever they want.  This means that the market could very well have the used game price point set at a level where, even after a cut from Microsoft, end users still make more money than they would selling to Gamestop.

 

True, but doubtful. Assuming Gamestop is somehow able to stay in the Used Games business, every tom **** and harry is competing with them to sell their used games. Meaning that the seller needs to get a better deal selling his game online than gamestop gives, and has to punch in a markup for the publisher and developer cut. We can't run numbers (and yes, I was projecting) but it seems to me that if developers and microsoft are getting a cut, they'll have a forceful say in how much of a price there is.  And publishers are notoriously reluctant to lower their prices on games. There were a few PS2 games that were selling for 30 new, and in the 5 dollar bin for used back when I worked at gamestop.

 

"On a final note, if it's possible to trade games digitally, the Xbox One would allow me to do something I've never been able to do before: easily lend a game to Calax."

 

Possibly, possibly not. I'm wary of anything a company says is good for me because usually it's stupidly convoluted, or requires something extra.

 

This is Microsoft, the company that requires me to pay them 10 bucks a month for an Xbox Live subscription, to be able to watch Netflix, which I already pay for. I'm not going to pay for freaking Xbox Live just to use my blasted system, but I'm betting they're just gonna leave their online component as is (with free accounts basically being worthless) simply because that's been how they do business for the past 6 years.

[Nordicus]

PC games start cheaper and drop faster without second hand sales.

I've never understood this train of thought. Less unwanted competition -> developers and publishers are more content with their financial performance -> forementioned groups are more customer-friendly? Not in many cases have I actually seen improved customer relations and deals be born out of growth, in fact quite the opposite. The industry is absolutely swamped with people who would slowly test our limits. I'm absolutely not convinced PC game prices would lower any slower had Bioshock not started that whole DRM nonsense.

 

Now, digital stores, that's another story. You can have a sale and get some extra customers for no actual loss. Also, in many major multi-platform releases, PC sells half the copies of either console (which might come from people migrating to consoles from DRM nonsense, different gaming tastes, good gaming PCs potentially having a smaller userbase than the consoles, or in some people's opinion piracy), so the platform might need some reinvigorated money flow compared to the consoles.

 

Also as a side note, even with this much competition on the PC, the GFWL PC game store doesn't act very competitive. For example, it charges twice as much for the Fallout 3 expansions and War For Cybertron as Steam, and 10€ more for Dark Souls. When used games are out of the picture, I don't see Microsoft leading an affordable console-gaming future

Edited May 24, 2013 by Nordicus

[Zoraptor]

I don't see anything about the camera always watching you.

 

That comes from the statement that the on3 will simply not work if kinect isn't connected/ present.

 

That doesn't outright state that the camera will be running 24/7 whether the box is on or off, but- as previous- it has been said that the microphone will function that way if you don't actually unplug the box to turn it off.

[Bester]

Most of us tuned in to the Xbox One reveal on Tuesday night. Being a live conference, anything can go wrong. So it's almost acceptable that 90% of the voice commands during the Xbox One reveal weren't performed based on what what Yusuf Mehdi was saying. Look at the IGN video below (skip to 1:39:00 or click here) and notice that anytime Yusuf begins talking about an Xbox One voice command, his left hand automatically goes into his pocket, presumably to press a clicker to proceed to a new slide or something similar (unless he's playing one-handed ping-pong if you know what I mean).

 

 

http://me.ign.com/en/news/11383/fyi-the-xbox-one-voice-commands-weren-t-in-real-time

 

[Calax]

Except that he was also shutting off users Kinects