Should there be a Kinect-less Xbox One SKU?

by ·0 Comments

Why not kill Kinect? Recently the question was posed to me, “Do you think Microsoft would ever sell the Xbox One without the Kinect?” At the time I was firmly adamant that Microsoft would never do such a thing, stating that they have gone all-in on Kinect on the Xbox One. In that same discussion, we talked about the Nintendo Wii-U and the added expense that Nintendo ensues on the Gamepad, which we decided hadn’t been taken advantage of nearly enough. I then raised the idea of Nintendo selling the Wii-U sans Gamepad. I was quickly put in-check as to why I thought Nintendo could sell the Wii-U without the Gamepad, and Microsoft could not sell the Xbox One without the Kinect. Obviously, this got me thinking.

Of course the Microsoft Kinect and Nintendo GamePad are both integral experiences to their respective systems, so much so that both companies have stated on the record, that they won’t be selling their consoles without said devices. Be that as it may, stances change.

Admittedly, the Xbox One is fairly early on in its life-cycle, and there is little data to go on. There has only been a few major titles thus far that have been positioned to be totally dependent on the Kinect—Kinect Sports Rivals, Just Dance 2014, and Zumba Fitness World Party.

In addition to the games outlined above—along with all the other games that may only marginally use Kinect’s functions—Kinect will automatically sign a user in, allow for video calling in the Skype app, can be used for working out with the Xbox Fitness app, and can even be used with the Twitch app for game streaming. All the aforementioned things are certainly nice to have, and could not exist without Kinect. Microsoft has not only packed in the Kinect for the developer guarantee, but to also take advantage of the hardware within integral functions of the Xbox itself.

In my own personal use, I do use my Kinect, and use it often. Ninety-five percent of my interaction with the device is done in the form of voice control. The other five percent is when it signs me in automatically or the occasional Skype call, which is nice, but not necessary. Also the Kinect IR blasting capabilities are pretty helpful, and is something I would miss a lot if it were gone. I don’t think I’ve manually turned on my television since setting up the console.

So again, could the Xbox One exist without the Kinect?

At this point, Kinect has been woven into the very fabric of what the Xbox One is. Without it, you are automatically cut off from certain games, apps, and integral console functions.  It stands to reason that voice control could conceivably be built directly into future consoles. But even so, certain other things will be instantly lost from what makes this console unique. A Kinect-less Xbox One would alienate you from games and apps, taking away an important developer guarantee that every use will at least have the hardware.

The main reason that killing the Kinect would be a good idea would be the price of the console, but beyond that, the reasons are few. With sales trailing behind that of the PlayStation 4, there is a need to reach price-parity as soon as possible. Also the argument could be made that there hasn’t been a title that truly compels a gamer to latch onto the use of the device. That may be true, but we are only six months into this consoles life, and  it’s much too early to tell whether that title will come or not.

Finally, a Kinect-less SKU would ultimately have a negative effect on the Xbox One, and I don’t see any chance of Microsoft selling the console without it. At first glance, it seems do-able, but a closer look reveals how deeply integrated the Kinect has been channeled into every aspect of this console. I’m not saying it won’t happen, but I would certainly be shocked if it does. Now about that Wii-U Gamepad…  

Windows 8, Taming the Two-Headed Beast

by ·2 Comments

surface

When Microsoft first debuted their new and improved touch interface—which was originally known as Metro—for Windows 8, people flipped, and not in the good way. Windows 8 was different, really different. This was Microsoft’s volley to hoist their device converging software upon the masses, attempting to bridge the gap between tablet and desktop environments.

There is no doubt that things went awry very early-on as information started to leak about the new operating system, with hardcore user’s non-acceptance, and novice user’s shock and confusion. Even before Windows 8 actually reached the hands of its consumers, things weren’t looking good for the guys over in Redmond. Initially this angst seemed more of a clear revolt against change to a touch-first focus, rather than truly bad design. But uneasiness grew even stronger as Microsoft rolled out betas of the new operating system and the worst fears of early adopters were realized.

In the wake of said fears, it has taken Windows 8 quite some time to penetrate the market, as most corporations have stuck with the now rock-solid Windows 7 or the now un-supported Windows XP. All the while everyday-consumer trends have been moving toward the now popular tablet solutions for most computing needs. Weather it be Apple’s iPad or the smattering of Android tablets, the writing seems to be on the wall for the desktop computer, at least in the minds of the average mainstream user.

Now that we are well over a year and a half into Windows 8 being prevalent in the computing retail atmosphere, I have begun to see more and more people using the new operating system, and it hasn’t been pretty. In the cases where I’ve played tech-support, attempts to educate would-be adopters have ended with them either going completely back to Windows 7, or using third-party tools to alleviate the pain to use something so vastly different. Power and novice users alike have been universally on the same page about their opinion of Windows 8, they don’t want the Modern user-interface.

As I’ve stated before, implementing a tablet interface into their mainstay product seemed to be a reasonable move for Microsoft, but a major miscalculation in the mainstream acceptance of a half-tablet half-desktop amalgamation of software would leave customers in dismay, and Microsoft scrambling for a solution. Simply put, Microsoft should not have forced Metro/Modern UI on their users. From the company’s perspective, this was a brilliant move, and I can agree with their position except for one glaring fact, people hate Metro. Or at least they hate what Metro originally was and stood for.

Of course my advice to some of thinking of Metro as a glorified Start Screen should be enough in most cases, but I can’t be blind to the fact that Windows 8, as it originally shipped, required a new way of thinking. And we all know what happens when a user is presented with even the slightest change in the way an application’s user-interface works right? Just ask Facebook.

SurfaceArrivesinSeat_Web (1)

Many steps have been taken to alleviate the pain of the new UI. With Windows 8.1, which came out nearly a year after Windows 8 as a freely available upgrade, Microsoft added much needed user-interface and desktop changes that made things a bit more tolerable for the legacy user like: booting directly to desktop, an all apps view on the Start Screen, and an actual Start Button among other things.

  • The Start Button Returns
  • Boot to Desktop
  • More Lock screen and Start Screen Options
  • Refreshed Xbox Music
  • Better Search
  • Better Multi-Monitor Support
  • Windows Store Improvements
  • More Extensive OneDrive Integration
  • More Comprehensive Metro Control Panel
  • 3D-Printing Support

Even with these changes, most people didn’t feel Microsoft went far enough. So this year Microsoft dropped Windows 8.1 Update, which can mostly be seen as a service pack. This update provided additional improvements to, again, move things more inline with the Windows of times past. Improvements in this update included: a more prominent power button, the ability see open Metro applications on the taskbar for desktop users, and the ability to x-close Metro applications for desktop users, among many more features geared toward traditional desktop users.

  • Modern App Title Bar
  • Start: Search
  • Start: Power button
  • Start and Apps: Context menu

These changes have been welcomed. And with the induction of a new CEO, Satya Nadella, Microsoft has moved to a cadence of rapid release that will hopefully make for a better Windows for both the desktop and tablet users alike, ultimately fostering a more palatable experience and improve adoption. What was originally a usability problem has now become more-less a perception problem. Most of the glaring issues that would have keep someone away have been addressed in its current iteration, making for a less-jarring, more familiar experience.

Some changes are easier to handle than others. Windows 8 was a huge change. Was it the right move? Who knows, but one things is clear. When your company is as vast as Microsoft is, and your piece of software is so entrenched in the DNA of the computing industry, any change is going to be a huge thing. Should a tablet-centric operating system be separate from a traditional desktop system? Probably, but what’s done is done. Let’s just hope Microsoft continues to steer this humongous ship in the right direction. Here’s for veering away from that iceberg.

Sources: ExtremeTech, WinSuperSite

 

Microsoft, It’s Time For An Xbox Platinum Membership

by ·0 Comments

xbox

Over the past few years or so, Microsoft have made a targeted effort to put all their entertainment services under the Xbox moniker, dropping the branding of times past, with the death of the Zune and the emergence of Windows Phone. With said changes, there has come a wide-array of branding efforts to meld the look and feel of the Xbox Music and Xbox Video applications across Windows 8, Xbox One, and Windows Phone devices.

The question that’s begging to be asked is, “Other than the obvious branding benefits of having Music and Video under the same name, why use the Xbox brand.” The answer to this question is in-fact more simple than one would realize. The Xbox is easily one of Microsoft’s most-beloved business areas. It’s one of the few areas of the company that has garnered an Apple-like cult following. While attempting to quantify the amount of rabid  fanboyism surrounding the Xbox brand, one only needs to look at the colossal manner in which the Xbox 360 hardware was botched. The debacle was a result of console overheating, playing out very much in the public eye. It even fostered its own nickname, The Red Ring Of Death. Yet the massively loyal following was still there. Overcoming such an overwhelmingly critical-blow while maintaining an avid fan-base, shows the Xbox brand has the hearts and minds of the people.

And while these unification efforts have come as  a welcomed changed, it still feels like something may be missing with the formula. Why have various services under the same name, with similar look and feel, without providing the financial incentive across each? Wouldn’t it be worth while to create financial effectiveness with each of their offerings.

To point out a service that gets this right, we need look no further than Amazon and its Prime Membership. What do you get with a prime membership: two-day shipping from Amazon.com, unlimited instant streaming from Amazon Prime Video, and the ability to borrow books on your Kindle. That’s what synergy looks like.

In a recent interview Phil Spencer, who is the new head of Xbox, stated,  “I go back and I look at 1999 with Apple. And they, on the back of music, became a very relevant consumer brand.”

And it’s obvious that Xbox is attempting to do the same with the its brand as the core of entertainment on all Microsoft platforms. Yet and still there is a need to take things a bit further. That step could be the inclusion of an additional tier of Xbox Membership. So what would an Xbox Live Platinum membership entail? Making services that have the Xbox name, feel more like Xbox services. This is not just about the visual aesthetic and coalescence in name, but the services themselves.

Start off by making Xbox Music streaming available on Xbox One, Windows Phone, as well as Windows 8 for those paying for this tier of service. The fact that even the ad-supported version—like on Windows 8— is not there for at least  paying Gold members is a bit of a travesty. I think a lot of people would pay a bit more for a platinum membership if this was included. And to be honest, very few people are going to pay the normal $99.99 a year for a music subscription alone.

Next, provide more value in Xbox Video by providing an allotted amount of movies available each month at no additional cost. This can be done in a way that is something along the line of Games with Gold, or even just a static number for any movies on the service. This would also provide extra value to Xbox Video as a service, by allowing more familiarity with the platform.

Another thing they could look at is extending the Games with Gold model to other platforms. How about one free Window Phone or Window 8 game a month for those with a platinum membership? Sony does this now by including the PlayStation Vita in their free games a month offering. Or better yet, once the newly announced universal apps are in place, provide one free a month.

How about some free SkypeOut minutes? This is something that I see probably not even being used that much, but sometimes its the thought that counts. I would speculat the amount of people actually purchasing Skype minutes is very low. Margin for this portion of the Skype service can’t be great, but the potential sentiment for subscribers of an all-encompassing subscription can be.

Additionally, but probably the least likely, implement some form of Office 365 rights for the platinum member. The ability to install Microsoft Office on one device would be enough to add value for even the lightest of office users.

Again, all of the aforementioned proposals are not only meant to make Xbox Live as a service a better proposition, but also to foster a sense of cohesiveness among Microsoft as a company. With Satya Nadella at the helm as the new CEO, and Phil Spencer now taking over the Xbox reigns, the time is ripe to make a huge impact on the company in Redmond. If Microsoft is truly now a services company, then in the words of a one Jean-Luc Picard, “Make it so.”

These are just a few things that come to my head. What are your ideas?

I Listen To Way Too Many Podcasts

by ·2 Comments

47835-monday_podcast_setup

I’m a podcast addict. Since my first Apple iPhone back in the day, I have found myself listening to a wide-array of these online radio shows. While finding the time to indulge in the plethora of content out there may be harder from some than others, there is certainly something out there for everyone.

Enter my personal podcast playlist. This list changes from time to time, but the core shows tend to remain the same, containing the necessary listening for the gaming and technology focused podcast-listening geek. Hopefully this humble-bundle will put you well on the path to addition.

Everyone

Geek-Focused

Gamer-Focused

  • DLC, Jeff Cannata’s weekly show that covers video and table-top gaming.
  • Garnett on Games, Garnet Lee’s weekly show about the gaming industry.
  • Giant Bombcast, the GiantBomb crew talks about the happening in gaming.
  • Reality Breached, an in-depth look at the Video Game industry and its business practices.
  • Techpedition, technology ramblings and entertainment from the Techpedition pundits.
  • Xbox Live’s Major Nelson Radio, Xbox LIVE’s Major Nelson’s weekly podcast.

Developer-Focused

Defiance — Season 1 Review

by ·3 Comments

The Defiance franchise comes with a lot of baggage in tow, presented as part television show, part video game. Being marketed as such may be something that could bolster the series to popularity, or ultimately be its downfall, especially if one turns out to be an epic fail. The writing may be on the wall for the video game portion, as thus far the game has gotten lackluster reviews. Be that as it may, we will be taking a look at season one of the television series, to see if it can at least hold up its end of the bargain.

In the not too distant future, the Votans, a collection of seven different races, arrive on earth. A planet in which they had previously thought to be uninhabited, or so we are originally told. What first starts off as peaceful negotiations, then gradual colonization, leads to a global war known as the ‘Pale Wars’, which culminates in the Ark fleet exploding, releasing massive terra-forming technology on earth. After the ‘Arkfall’ event, a peace treaty is brokered, resulting in a war-torn earth in which humans and the Votans are forced to co-exist.

In the opening of the series we are introduced to Joshua Nolan (Grant Browler) and his daughter Irisa Nyira (Stephanie Leonidas). But something is obviously different about this father-daughter duo. Irisa is an alien—an Irathient to be exact—and her supposed father is a human who served in the Pale Wars. We later learn they become a duo after Irisa’s village was raided and her parents were killed. But there is more to this girl than meets the eye.

We find that Irisa and Nolan live as nomads, moving from place to place, scavenging valuable items left over from the Pale Wars in order to survive. Their journey eventually leads them to a place called Defiance, which you and I know as St. Louis, Missouri. Once the duo arrive in Defiance in an attempt to make some money from a recent find, they are compelled to stay through an uncontrollable series of events in which Nolan becomes the town law-keeper.

The series plays on the human-alien conflict, the search for valuable artifacts, and an underlying power struggle between Amanda Rosewater (Julie Benz)—the newly appointed town’s mayor—and her followers, versus Datak Tara (Tony Curran)—a very powerful but shady Castihan businessman—and his followers. Most of the series follows the antics surrounding these political and cultural differences, in which Amanda is eventually challenged for her seat as mayor by Datak. Not surprisingly the season is filled with a host of secrets, treachery, lies, and scheming from Datak to bolster his cause.

Then there is the search for very powerful artifacts, which are known to be somewhere in the mines of Defiance. Many are willing to kill to get the artifacts, most surprisingly of which is the former mayor Nicolette Riordan (Fionnula Flanagan). It is later revealed the artifacts are the key to a powerful ancient ship.

Throughout the series we see protagonist Nolan keeping the order as much as possible to keep Defiance safe from not only internal power struggle, but from external confrontation as well. Which comes in the from of the Volge, Irathient Riders, and The Earth Republic. Nolan, his deputy-daughter Irisa, and deputy Tommy LaSalle (Dewshane Williams), handle most everything in stride, with the town coming together to aid in extreme circumstances.

As it stands Nolan is pretty much a bad-ass who can handle most any situation, due to his military training and experience in the Pale Wars. As a lawman he’s a likable guy and holds a strong allegiance to the mayor who hired him. Iriza on the other hand doesn’t carry that charm. She is a quiet and very violent person who acts one hundred percent on emotion. As the story unfolds we find there is something special about her that is only starting to unfold by the end of the season. We eventually find the artifact found somehow has something to due with Iriza, and awakens special powers within her.

All in all, for me to say that I’m excited about season two would be a it of an overstatement. And I dare not say the overly used phrase “cautiously optimistic.” I’ll continue to watch this show with the same perspective I’ve had from the start, not expecting a lot, but welcoming the occasional pleasant surprise. The second season of Defiance begins sometime in June on the SYFY channel.

Source: Wikipedia, Official Defiance Website