Will there be an Xbox one console without all the connect stuff?
The best thing that could happen is if they actually produce some kind of VR/AR headset, that combined with Kinect would definitely be worth it. We'll wait a year and see what happens. (Sony might do something similar).
Considering that Microsoft recently announced that you can completely disconnect the kinect from the one and it still plays, I'd say it isn't out of the realm of possibility that they will release a version sans kinect in the next year or so.
If they weren't going to do it now, when it would matter the most, they probably won't do it any time soon.
Will there be an Xbox one console without all the connect stuff?
This is the only thing that makes the Kinect somewhat interesting and practical to me. They need to move beyond crappy shoehorned (and pointless) compatibility with third party games or having it used as a dance game peripheral if its ever going to be taken seriously by the majority of gamers.
You don't have to use it
Yes very true , but why pay £450.00 for a console with no game and an item I will never use?
This is the only thing that makes the Kinect somewhat interesting and practical to me. They need to move beyond crappy shoehorned (and pointless) compatibility with third party games or having it used as a dance game peripheral if its ever going to be taken seriously by the majority of gamers.
Kind of like the way they made you use the 3 axis crap in ps3 games.
For sure. Motion control in general has been a bust IMO. The Kinect works great for dance games, but other than that, it's all been an answer to a question no one asked. VR could change all that though. At least with the Kinect. I'm not sure if the Eye will have a practical application.
But Microsoft made a concession to openness, with a backdoor on the first two versions of the Xbox. That enabled people to use the console to display and access content they owned outright and had stored on PCs in the home.
Unfortunately, that door has been removed from the Xbox One. Last week the company confirmed that the console won’t come with the “media extender” feature that enabled people to use the console to stream music, photos and video from a PC.
So far we mostly have details how the Xbox One handles music. It turns out that it will not be able to play music you own and have stored on a PC or home network, at least not directly and without a fee.
“For now it’s a $10 subscription per month on the console to get access to that,” Porter (left) said, adding that more options may come after the Xbox One is launched.
In other words, if you want to play your music collection through the console’s default music app, you’ll have to subscribe to the premium version of the app, which costs $10 per month or $100 for a yearly subscription.
Then you can upload your music collection to Microsoft’s cloud storage service, and stream it back to the console via the Internet.
That’s in addition to the $60 per year that you must pay for premium Xbox Live Gold membership to use the music app in the first place.
Why? It’s partly because the company is still new to this stuff and figuring out what capabilities to include. The initial emphasis is on building a tight, crisp service and not one with loopholes and extensions.
But the company also is trying to get more people to subscribe to its online services, which will make more money per user than a console or operating system that’s replaced every five years.
Maybe I’m too old-fashioned, but I’ve watched Microsoft spend more than a decade encouraging people to use their PC as the hub of their digital life. For a while it even said families should have servers at home to securely store and stream their music, photos, videos and files.
Now it would prefer that you move that hub to a Microsoft data center, accessible for only $10 per month.
This is the path that beckons in a closed garden.