Microsoft Finally Selling Xbox One Without Kinect

DroidJason1 writes: "Microsoft has unbundled the Kinect from the Xbox One. The unbundled system's price now matches the PlayStation 4. Microsoft is touting 'your feedback' as the reason for this move. Any Xbox One functionality that relies on voice, video, gestures, etc, will not work without a Kinect, and users will be able to purchase a standalone Kinect later this year."

Comments

LOL

[sexconker]

The 180s never cease.

Re:LOL

[NotDrWho]

With the Xbox One, MS has been backpedaling faster than Lance Armstrong approaching a drug-test checkpoint. Suddenly all those bad ideas that were so "essential" are turning into what they were all along: just fucking bad ideas.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

And it should still be at least $100 cheaper than the PS4, considering it is inferior (slower GPU, slower RAM, less RAM, no secondary CPU).

Re:LOL

[nine-times]

Not just that, but they're putting the start menu back in Windows. I'm starting to like this new CEO.

Re:LOL

[Megane]

It's a comon error; nothing too loose your shit over...

Your right, their's alot of things worse then that.

Correction / FTFY

[brunes69]

s/Your feedback/A massive lack of sales

Re:Correction / FTFY

[rsborg]

s/Your feedback/A massive lack of sales

In Capitalist USA, where dollars = votes, this is the best form of feedback.

Too little, too late

[gstoddart]

Starting from when they said there would be an always-on internet requirement (and then there wasn't), and then the whole "no selling of used games policy" (and then there wasn't), Microsoft has more or less annoyed. confused and alienated their potential user base.

Sure, some people will buy it no matter what.

But, for some of us, give us a gaming platform which doesn't need an internet connection, isn't providing an always on internet connected camera, and doesn't handcuff us to how you think we want to use it.

I don't want a gaming platform for Netflix, Hulu, Bing, Dong, Boing, or anything else. I'd also like to be able to play motion controlled games without an internet connection, because I'm not playing on-line games. Ever.

And, if you can't provide that to me, I don't want your product.

At this point, I see more value in buying a spare XBox 360 than even considering the XBone.

Re:Too little, too late

[gstoddart]

You should learn how to read. There was never a "no selling of used games policy" and there was never an "always-on internet requirement".

Perhaps you should learn how to use Google?

Because at various times, Microsoft has announced those were (or would be) requirements.

I can't blame you for being confused, having never read the actual articles.

And I can't blame you for being a tool who hasn't really been following this saga. But, nonetheless, I will.

Because you're clearly ill-informed about all of the things Microsoft has said, and then retracted about this console. And, I can assure you, BOTH of those things had been announced and then changed by them.

Re:Too little, too late

[Graymalkin]

Microsoft has more or less annoyed. confused and alienated their potential user base.

Microsoft's big problem with their policies and backpedaling is that people like me simply cannot trust anything they say. Rational buyers aren't now going to run out and buy XBones because there's no guarantee Microsoft won't go back to their original policies once sales improve.

If anything they need to abandon disliked policies and declare publicly with some manner of legal obligation that they will never go back to them. Until then I won't even consider buying an XBone or any subsequent Microsoft console.

Re:Too little, too late

[Dutch Gun]

For the past two console generations (since the original Xbox came out), I've owned every major console brand, but have generally preferred the Xbox. As such, all my games, except for console exclusives, were for Xbox. I found the original Xbox controllers to be superior to Nintendo's or Sony's consoles, and this trend continued until now. MS's "gamer score" was also rather addictive, and was one of their more brilliant ideas of the last generation of consoles. I've also been maintaining a gold account for many years, since most of my friends are on Live, and let's face it, the service was *vastly* superior to the offerings of any other company - of course, for a paid service, it damn well better be.

I may eventually purchase an Xbone, but it might very well come after a PS4, which surprised me. For every Wii or PS3 game, I probably have seven or eight Xbox/Xbox 360 games. I'm thinking about cancelling my Live account (although I recently signed up for another year, so it will be a while), as I rarely seem to play online with my friends these days, preferring solo play.

How did Microsoft lose me as a customer, at least so far?

1) No backward compatibility. I've got a pretty big Xbox 360 library, with a number of games I haven't started/finished or would like to perhaps play again. Backward compatibility would have virtually assured a purchase of an Xbone device, since I know that eventually there will be games on it that I'd like to play. However, I've got to decide now which console in my entertainment center will be displaced by a new console (I've currently got four - all three last gen plus a PS2), and that's my current limit of the switching box I have installed. Microsoft should have stuck with an x86 architecture for the 360, and we'd be able to play all three versions of Xbox games on the latest console with few issues. People argue that compatibility isn't critical (which is admittedly true), since I obviously already have a 360, but I'm literally at the point where I don't have any more room to plug in another console. So now that's just one more device I need to keep connected indefinitely as long as there exists a possibility of wanting to play a 360 game. There's also another message that no backward compatibility sends: we don't care about your loyalty as a customer.

2) Xbox as an advertising billboard. Microsoft decided to heavily monetize their console's connectivity with ads, even for those of us with Gold Live accounts. Either/or, Microsoft. I don't appreciate you double-dipping like that, and every time I see the massive wall of advertisements on every single page of my Xbox One, I get annoyed when I realized that I'm also paying for that service. At this point, I'm largely paying for Microsoft to simply serve me advertisements on my gaming console. Fuck that. Why should I pay hundreds of dollars for another platform that can assault me with non-stop ads between gaming sessions.

3) Disappointing "next-gen" experience. In general, the next-gen experience hasn't really wowed me. Games can barely even render at a full 1080p, for heaven's sake, which I certainly didn't expect of a "next-gen" console at this point. The hard drives are pathetically small, and the Xbone's, of all the idiotic things, is not user-upgradeable (unlike the PS4). It won't take too many installs or downloads before that's all used up, and then you're playing the shuffling game with your drive space.

4) Consumer-unfriendly arrogance. Phone home once per day or your Xbox bricks? Ok, I actually like the idea of being able to install your games and not having to put the disc in for validation. The only practical way to do this is to have an online check to make sure more than one person isn't using the same disc, but this could have been an optional setting, and the way they decided to ram this down people's throat was ridiculous. There was also the specter of killing the used-game market, and frankly, MS didn't have a lot of trust to spare at

Re:Too little, too late

[Anubis IV]

You should learn how to read. There was never a "no selling of used games policy"

People in glass houses shouldn't call the kettle black. When Microsoft first spelled out how the One would work, they made it pretty clear (well, as clear as Microsoft legalese can be) that gamers couldn't sell their games to just anyone. Rather, gamers would only be able to sell their games to participating retailers, and even then, only if the game's publisher had opted-in to allowing resales for copies of that game (and then the publisher could optionally tack a fee onto the transaction too, thus decreasing how much money you get to take home).

Similarly, you couldn't sell it to friends or online folks. The only option would be to give it away to them, and, once again, you could only do so if the publisher had opted-in to allowing game trades between individuals. Oh, and an additional restriction was that each game could only ever be given away one time, and even then, only to people who had been on your friends list for at least 30 days. They also outright prohibited renting of games or loaning of physical copies of games to friends.

Given all of those ridiculous terms and conditions, I can see how you might have been confused and failed to realize that the One had those policies in place when it was first announced. Even so, since you read the actual articles, I'd have hoped for better.

As for the always-on requirement, sure, you can play the pedant by pointing out it only needed to phone home once a day rather than constantly, but that's pointless, since it does nothing to address why the requirement was such a source of contention. The reason it was annoying was because it immediately eliminated a number of valid and legitimate use cases in which gamers wouldn't have a regular connection to the Internet. In the armed forces? Too bad. Internet down for a few days? Too bad. Just moved? Too bad. Traveling? Too bad. Out at sea? Too bad. Vacationing in your summer cabin? Too bad. Don't want to connect devices that have no practical need to be online? Too bad. Don't think a company has any business tracking what you're doing with offline, disc-based, single-player games? Too bad.

And the OP was being kind, since he skipped over all of the indie developer controversies that were around early on after the One's announcement, such as requiring that they work with a major publisher. I also noticed that you didn't address his issues with the always-on camera and that they've since flip-flopped on that requirement as well.

The fact that Microsoft managed to make Sony look good, despite the fact that Sony was in the doghouse with virtually every gamer after all of the PSN stuff a few years back, just goes to show you how badly they messed up with the One's launch.

Disclaimer: I own all three consoles of the last gen, and none of the current gen consoles.

Re:Microsoft misses the point.

[MozeeToby]

The very same announcement also announced that a Gold membership will no longer be required for streaming services.

The most conservative machine leads.

[Kalren]

I think it goes to show that the market for consoles has become more conservative. When you compare the PS4, XBone and the WII U(yes the Wii U is a part of the market), the PS4 is probably the most simple in its configuration. It doesn't have extraneous gimmicks like a Kinect camera or Wii U tablet that increase the cost of the system. Sure the controller has a LED and a touchpad,but it's not a huge new way of gaming that leads to more casually focused games.With the PS4, you only really get a box and a controller.

The casual market that Microsoft and Nintendo built their machine to appeal to is already satisfied with their phones and tablets for their day to day fix. And for the majority of gamer in the market for a PS4 or XBone, they also have phones and tablets with a great selection of casual games. So when the choice is given between the different consoles, they choose the one with a more enthusiast focus. Their itch for casual games is already sated. And it doesn't hurt that the PS4 GPU is 30-50% more capable and at the same price as an XBone(Kinect-less SKU).