Topic: The Next Xbox Getting Revealed May 21st.

It's completely batshit on paper, but I'm willing to bet that there's enough retards out there that will just lap it up.

I'm sure Microsoft won't make a 24/7 internet connection a necessity. They aren't retards, I'll bet plenty of cash that they saw the reactions to the rumors.

I don't care about exclusives, since barring a few here and therem none of them will appeal to me. That is, if this gen is any indication. Normally I love exclusives, but this gen there have only been a handful that I really enjoyed, and it's looking like that might be the case for next gen as well, if the PS4 is anything to go by.

I'm not interested in the next Xbox simply because I don't trust Microsoft to not make a bunch of decisions that I won't like, and I do trust that Microsoft will fail in the hardware design department once again, resulting in a console that's liable to break frequently.

But I'll probably watch it anyways, just in case I'm wrong, which I do hope I will be.

Funny thing: I got my 360 in early 2008, and it has had almost no problems at all. I've never had to send it in for any kind of maintenance.

When I read stories of people who are on their seventh 360, I really feel like I've dodged a bullet!

My body is ready...to laugh at u

Is a required internet connection really such a bad thing? I'm sorry, but I don't think I have ever played my 360 without it being online, and I do not live in a big city. Look how popular Steam is... how can you say that always online just isn't feasible when a service like that has been going strong for a decade.

@SCAR392 Eye Toy came out in 2003. Sing Star came out in 2004. Buzz! The Music Quiz came out in 2005. Sony was going after non-gamers well before the Wii. Here in the UK, they were getting them too. I remember going to parties with very non-gaming crowds and being surprised when the eye toy and the buzz controllers were brought out.

That's what the kiddies call 'the good stuff' at parties nowadays

Peach 64 you lost all credibility with that. Just take a look at Diablo 3 lol. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2WZhJccOMs There's a multitude of reasons why its a bad idea for consumers. Lets not forget how your ISP bill is going to skyrocket, no product is "always online".
Anyway I guess everyone who loves Fifa in Europe is going to be disappointed half of them arent connected to the net XD.

How is my ISP bill going to Skyrocket exactly? When my computer is on, it's always connected to the net. When my 360 is on, it's always connected to the net. When my Wii is on, its always connected to the net. When my 3DS is on, it's always connected to the net. When my phone is on, it's always connected to the net.

What do you guys do? Go into your settings and turn off the connection when you're not playing online or downloading something? Everything is always connected these days. I live in a tiny little town and I've had always on broadband for over 12 years. I watch all my TV and movies over the Internet, I buy most of my games through steam, I buy all my music and books via downloads. Heck, most of my phone calls are over the Internet. Why is everyone pretending we're not at an always connected stage already?

I ask again, is Steam a failure in any way? It's the saviour of PC gaming and it requires an Internet connection.

I have no plans to buy this console so have no need to defend it, but I can't stand seeing people making these ridiculous claims about how we're not ready for this.

To be fair the reason why the 360 had hardware problems in the first place was because they decided to rush it out to be a year early instead of launching with PS3/Wii. In hindsight it was a calculated risk that payed off and they handled the rrrod pretty well.

I bought one of launch day(28 hours spent in line and my bottom was killing me) but it was 4 years later that I decided to sell it to get a newer slim model and my old one is still working fine. A friend of mine bought it and still uses it.

Well, since YOUR stuff is always connected to the internet, obviously that always holds true for everyone else as well. Nobody could POSSIBLY be living in an environment where they don't have access everywhere, 24/7, to speedy broadband internet.

People don't complain about Steam because it was started as a digital distribution service for PC gamers. There's an assumption there that people have at least some way of connecting to the net. Not so with consoles. For many people, without access to reliable internet, consoles and handhelds remain their way to comfortably play games. Heck, many people use their consoles for entertainment when they go other places where they know they won't be able to reliably access the internet.

And even Steam makes concessions for the fact that not everyone has access to stable, 24/7 internet. Oftentimes the only reason I'm able to use Steam when I visit home is because I can put it into offline mode and can continue to play my games even when the internet spends most of the day being inaccessible because we're unable to get anything other than a substandard satellite connection.

It'll be even worse if the system really has no disc drive, as some rumors have gone. Are you aware that millions of people have small download limits for their internet usage every month? Should we just say "to heck with those people" because YOU happen to live in a place where YOU have access to broadband internet?

If Microsoft goes this route, millions of people won't be able to purchase their system and play it regularly. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo will love it. It'll be the cheapest advertising for their own next-gen hardware that they've ever had.

In short, your comments have been the modern equivalent of "let them eat cake."

I don't think it will be online only, that wouldn't make any sense, unless it has good cellular internet along with wi-fi. Even with 4G, you still shouldn't have to pay that to play. That's just speculation, though... Or maybe Xbox Live will include 4G service, so you're not paying for online AND 4G, but both at the same time.

Honestly I dont see how people can justify paying for Xbox Live when everything is so bloody expensive.
Perhaps if you were born in the heat of summer you'd be somewhat more frugal with your funds.

Not in the long run. They permanantly burned a lot of customers, and it's gonna be really tough getting First day sales now, as far as I can tell.

I remember the 2nd degree burns I got from my Xbox. Not very fun while you're trying to beat up Bane.

Geez, everyone doubts every console it seems. Wii U is not good enough. Xbox sounds crazy. PS4 isn't that great to me personally, and I've heard similar.
Honestly, I think Wii U is great, and Xbox will most likely be my next purchase as my powerful console.
The saying "too good to be true" is just as relevant as "too bad to be true".
I don't think Xbox would ever go online only unless they just put 4G receivers in home consoles which would require an Xbox Live subscription to be activated for both at home which has Wi-Fi, and the known possibility that there is no internet, but be included in the service at no extra cost.

I think the Wii U will be the most attractive next-gen machine once Nintendo gets the ball rolling on the first-party software, which will boost sales, which will attract more third-party developers. Really, they should have launched it with a proper 3D Mario game.

As much as everyone that has a Wii U wants games, I think it's a better lesson to learn that some things aren't as immediate as alot think, and waiting pays off in some cases. The long term will better than the short term. Nintendo actually has reasons to be slow with their progress. Any one that knows the situation understands.
Wii U is nothing like last gen consoles if you take power being the main appeal out of the equation, and will have a more broad market with the control schemes and accessibility it has. Nintendo has the console that will most likely get apps and smaller software on a larger scale. Just imagine smartphone or tablet apps with console graphics and more options than those devices limit them to.
Wii remote is still a very relevant controller that can be used for anything really.
Wii U is already a noticeable improvement to other consoles. You won't get an outcome from potential if you don't support it.
PS4 doesn't really appeal to me. Not only are the social features totally possible on Wii U, but that's also not the reason Nintendo gave to sell their console.
All Wii U has to do to avoid competition in the RAM standpoint is combine software or applications into one or two pieces of software instead of being spread across say, 5.
The CPU cores also use power to keep track of those multiple applications which can easily take up 1-2 cores right off the bat.
The way they harness the machines and the structures which are relative to each other will ultimately show what a console can do.
All I got to say is, if Nintendo goes through with that robot patent, I'm gonna have a robot. That's all there is to it.

Have you played most tablet/smartphone apps? They don't need more advanced graphics. Most of them barely qualify as games as is. I think that's actually the fear of some people, given Nintendo's casual turn last last gen. Also, from what I understand, the Wii U will most likely be, again, significantly underpowered compared to other consoles this gen. Which isn't a problem for me, or most people, really. If graphics were so important, the Vita would be sweeping the charts instead of the 3DS. Nintendo's appeal comes from strong first-party support and innovative control options. Nintendo will succeed if it can find a way to tap the dormant potential of the touchscreen controller.

I don't buy consoles to play Android apps. If I did, I would be getting the OUYA instead.