Half the Mixed Reality page is about games, tho. How can you say it's not focused on entertainment when that's what pretty much all the marketing is
Windows Mixed Reality Headsets--which, by the way, are very clearly not made by Microsoft, which is why they're called things like the "Samsung Odyssey" and the "Acer AH-101"--are very clearly aimed at games, seeing how VR has generally proven to be so prohibitively expensive that the non-gaming market reached practical buyer saturation a while ago (which is why PSVR, for example, has actually had ongoing success).
Hololens, which Microsoft literally manufacturers as a Microsoft product, and is called "Microsoft Hololens", is part of the WMR software ecosystem because it actually predates those third-party headsets and it would be kind of stupid for Microsoft to create two separate software brands and ecosystems for something as extremely niche as VR (+Hololens), especially given their status as the odd man out compared to Occullus and Valve. It is heavily focused on education and business (the website literally says "Mixed Reality Technology for Business", even though they've proven you can play some games on it. It's also multiple thousands of dollars per unit, because it's a stand-alone PC.
So they are separate things. To start, Microsoft clearly only makes one of them. For the others, Microsoft offered a technology standard they could adhere to (along with compatibility with Valve, etc.). And none of them are made for Xbox, which happens to be where Phil Spencer works. He didn't forget about WMR. He did (possibly) forget about PSVR, which actually has sold millions of units (specifically, about 4 million, or about 1 for every 25 Playstation 4s). But otherwise that's kind of like saying Microsoft manufactures video cards because every video card supports DirectX.
Synthesis on
+2
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
Their first target buyers are in the 100% commercial and industrial sector though, the marketing goes "oooh games!" because that's their front-facing page for consumer buzz
Half the Mixed Reality page is about games, tho. How can you say it's not focused on entertainment when that's what pretty much all the marketing
is
They have VR, but the Hololens, which while it can do VR is not truly a VR headset. The page isn't about their hardware, so much as featuring the VR support capability of Windows 10.
The page pictures hardware from Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, Asus(?) and Samsung:
Again, hardware being provided by other vendor partners.
The hololens has its own page, and is the only one they make. It also says it's the future of work. None of the content on the pages points to gaming, and their featured partners are primarily Xengineering and healthcare IT oriented thingers...
But the number one reason why it's not a consumer oriented product, but is geared toward enterprises:
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Also, on the top, the vents: if there are slats, it's an original model; if there are circular holes, it's an S; if there's none and they're only on the sides and back, it's an X.
The IR sensor is a good one too: none visible (it's still there, just hidden), original; right, S; left, X.
Also there's a model sticker somewhere (bottom or back depending on model) that will literally say what it is. (Pretty sure the S has that; the original and X definitely do.)
Note: The original Xbox One doesn't have an IR Blaster on the console itself, its IR blaster was in the Kinect.
Yes, this is correct--since the original console was bundled with the Kinect for some time, this was a nonissue.
Conversely, you'll need a breakout box (by now, a third-party solution that runs about $19.99) to connect an Kinect to either the Xbox One or XB1X (unless you have the big launch model, which it can plug in natively). Though this is probably a nonissue for most people by now.
I miss my Kinect so much. It pooped out and now I have an s. For all I know the Xbox port is what pooped out and the Kinect is fine.
The Kinect was awesome. Not for games, but just the native voice commands and "Xbox record that ". I had a puppy at the time and would use voice commands while in his area.
I wish I had that with my 2 month old daughter.
On another note, cuphead is hard. No way my gf can get through these run n gun levels.
For as much as the internet balked at the idea of a pure boss rush game the run n gun levels are easily the worst part of Cup Head.
Also, on the top, the vents: if there are slats, it's an original model; if there are circular holes, it's an S; if there's none and they're only on the sides and back, it's an X.
The IR sensor is a good one too: none visible (it's still there, just hidden), original; right, S; left, X.
Also there's a model sticker somewhere (bottom or back depending on model) that will literally say what it is. (Pretty sure the S has that; the original and X definitely do.)
Note: The original Xbox One doesn't have an IR Blaster on the console itself, its IR blaster was in the Kinect.
Yes, this is correct--since the original console was bundled with the Kinect for some time, this was a nonissue.
Conversely, you'll need a breakout box (by now, a third-party solution that runs about $19.99) to connect an Kinect to either the Xbox One or XB1X (unless you have the big launch model, which it can plug in natively). Though this is probably a nonissue for most people by now.
I miss my Kinect so much. It pooped out and now I have an s. For all I know the Xbox port is what pooped out and the Kinect is fine.
The Kinect was awesome. Not for games, but just the native voice commands and "Xbox record that ". I had a puppy at the time and would use voice commands while in his area.
I wish I had that with my 2 month old daughter.
On another note, cuphead is hard. No way my gf can get through these run n gun levels.
For as much as the internet balked at the idea of a pure boss rush game the run n gun levels are easily the worst part of Cup Head.
Basically, the game was the worst part of Cuphead. Graphics? Stunning. Inspired and executed to perfection. Music? Amazing. Atmosphere? Nailed it. Game? Nope.
Also, on the top, the vents: if there are slats, it's an original model; if there are circular holes, it's an S; if there's none and they're only on the sides and back, it's an X.
The IR sensor is a good one too: none visible (it's still there, just hidden), original; right, S; left, X.
Also there's a model sticker somewhere (bottom or back depending on model) that will literally say what it is. (Pretty sure the S has that; the original and X definitely do.)
Note: The original Xbox One doesn't have an IR Blaster on the console itself, its IR blaster was in the Kinect.
Yes, this is correct--since the original console was bundled with the Kinect for some time, this was a nonissue.
Conversely, you'll need a breakout box (by now, a third-party solution that runs about $19.99) to connect an Kinect to either the Xbox One or XB1X (unless you have the big launch model, which it can plug in natively). Though this is probably a nonissue for most people by now.
I miss my Kinect so much. It pooped out and now I have an s. For all I know the Xbox port is what pooped out and the Kinect is fine.
The Kinect was awesome. Not for games, but just the native voice commands and "Xbox record that ". I had a puppy at the time and would use voice commands while in his area.
I wish I had that with my 2 month old daughter.
On another note, cuphead is hard. No way my gf can get through these run n gun levels.
For as much as the internet balked at the idea of a pure boss rush game the run n gun levels are easily the worst part of Cup Head.
Basically, the game was the worst part of Cuphead. Graphics? Stunning. Inspired and executed to perfection. Music? Amazing. Atmosphere? Nailed it. Game? Nope.
4k/60fps (on One X) remasters of Vanquish and Bayonetta? Oh, don't mind if I do!
These are probably the PC ports that came out two or three years ago on Steam. I remember Vanquish had some big issues with gameplay stuff being tied to framerates but they got fixed up I believe.
It's weird that they're putting out Bayo 1 on everything under the sun given the franchise is basically a Switch exclusive now.
"Basically" in the sense that there are two Bayonetta games, and neither of them are exclusive to the Switch.
Bayonetta 2, after all, came out on the Wii U like 4 years earlier. So whenever Bayonetta 3 comes out, it will be the first game to actually be console exclusive to Switch. I assume. Unless they pull a NMS, which seems unlikely.
"Basically" a Switch exclusive franchise. Maybe not so weird after all.
Basically, the game was the worst part of Cuphead. Graphics? Stunning. Inspired and executed to perfection. Music? Amazing. Atmosphere? Nailed it. Game? Nope.
lmao the gameplay is tight as fuck
You aren't actually disagreeing. No-one would be talking about the game if it had the standard indie pixel art and chiptunes. However good the gameplay its easily the least notable aspect.
It's weird that they're putting out Bayo 1 on everything under the sun given the franchise is basically a Switch exclusive now.
"Basically" in the sense that there are two Bayonetta games, and neither of them are exclusive to the Switch.
Bayonetta 2, after all, came out on the Wii U like 4 years earlier. So whenever Bayonetta 3 comes out, it will be the first game to actually be console exclusive to Switch.
"Basically" a Switch exclusive franchise. Maybe not so weird after all.
1) The Wii U never happened.
2) 2 and 3 being Nintendo exclusive is the point. That is what blocks things coming to PC, not which Nintendo system it happens to be on.
Also, selling the title you can sounds like a better idea than not selling a title you can't.
Yeah, the original Bayonetta is a Switch exclusive the same way Halo: Combat Evolved is an Xbox One exclusive. Except that it came out on an earlier console literally years beforehand.
Technically speaking, so is Bayonetta 2 though, given the 4 year gap between the Wii U release and the Switch. Granted, it's possible that not many people in this thread owned Wii Us (we have regularly ruminated about the Xbox One's weak sale numbers--but it still looks like it had more than triple the Wii U's sales despite coming out a year later). The future of Bayonetta strongly suggests Switch exclusivity, similar to the future of Gears of War--except with a lower likelihood of a PC port (and that past Gears of War games have never appeared on Playstation or on a Nintendo platform). As I've often said, we're firmly in the era of mutiplatform exclusivity releases, where Final Fantasy has long since left Sony exclusivity and every virtually every new Xbox exclusive appears in Xbox on Windows 10 (and sometimes even Steam!). Truly a changing era.
Then you are obligated to remind us--see above. Otherwise, we're not going to engage in the necessary doublethink. In the meantime, 50% of the Bayonetta franchise is on Xbox and Playstation (eventually to be 33%), and 0% is only on Switch.
...I should explain that most die-hard Nintendo fans cheerfully accept "the Wii U never happened" as an obvious joke, because we realize the system, for all the things people enjoyed, was a massive commercial failure. Honest self-reflection on our hobbies -- it's a good thing.
Good fun aside, I don't think it's pedantic to point out that since Bayonetta, a a franchise, has two game, literally half of them (one) are readily playable on a wide variety of platforms. The other one is still not only on Switch because, hey, the Wii U is a thing, no matter how much one jokes about it.
To someone who wants to 1) wanted to play Bayonetta but 2) wasn't familiar with what platforms the game was released on, it's actually pretty pertinent (rather than pedantic?) information. Take half the statement--"Bayonetta is a Switch franchise." Someone who didn't own a Switch would, quite reasonably, conclude they couldn't play any game in the franchise. But that's not actually true. Seems kind of relevant. Making immediate information available to laypeople is a good thing in this thread.
Take the full statement--"It's weird that Bayonetta 1 is coming to so many platforms when Bayonetta is basically a Switch franchise." Except Bayonetta 1 already came to a bunch of platforms before it came to Switch, so why is that weird? An besides being relevant, it kind of seems self-contradicting to anyone who didn't already know...Bayonetta came to a bunch of different platforms. We do discuss what "exclusivity" means. It was in more than one of the OPs.
"The Wii U never came happened" doesn't strike me as "honest self-reflection" but you guys do you. I never owned a Wii U, so it's hard for me to weigh in. But I don't think it's pedantic pointing out that you can, in fact, play Bayonetta 2 on something besides a Switch; if you want you can buy both a copy of the game and the console on Amazon today. Is it good purchase for your money? Probably not? But I don't think that make it pedantic, especially after we spend more than a page discussing the viability of virtual reality headsets.
But I'm having fun with this--because I'm trapped at my desk with nothing better to do. The next time I say, "Ninja Gaiden, which is basically an Xbox franchise," I'm sure someone will take me apart too!
EDIT: God, I really want to rename this thread, "The Wii U Never Happened - A Thread for Honest Self-Reflection" but I'd hope the mods would come crashing down on it like vengeful gods.
Bayo 2 being "basically a Switch exclusive" is an accurate statement. "Basically" signifying not completely true, but true enough, because that is how little the Wii U counts in comparison. Especially when you look at huge sales of Wii U ports to Switch at full price.
Considering PSVR has a bit more than a third of the Wii U's install base, that would also make Phil "basically" right about VR. Even though it does look like a questionable thing to say when your company is still supporting WMR.
Hmm. I'd question use of "basically". That sounds lot more like "mostly", as it it's "mostly" true. I can demonstrate immediately how something that's "mostly" true is provably false, but that doesn't mean the initial statement isn't broadly useful even if is potentially inaccurate. Utility, as I noted, is important. That doesn't really change the fact that the other half of the franchise isn't exclusive even by the most stretched definitions. Come Bayonetta 3, I have to assume, it'll be a third not true, a third "basically" true, and a third actually true. Now how's that for pedantic?
I'm also one of this thread's ESOL participants. So that might shape my use of "basically" rather than "mostly". Maybe I've been using "basically" wrong all these years--Still doesn't seem weird to see Bayonetta on Xbox One X again.
Then again, I'm pretty sure I was the first person to point how how Phil Spencer was "actually" mistaken--there are millions of sold PSVRs. At least I'm consistent.
If you think of Phil as saying that VR gaming in its current state is basically as big of a niche failure as Bayonetta 2 on the Wii U, he was totally right.
edit: gaming specifically, it's going meaningful places in enterprise.
tastydonuts on
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
Posts
Except Microsoft doesn't "literally make" them--the manufacturers do.
Microsoft literally makes Hololens. Neither of which work with Xbox One. :tell_me_more:
This is reference literally no one will get.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I had to look it up, but it is look-up-able, and it's an awesome reference!
And now I have a movie I'm not sure if I should watch
Steam | XBL
Windows Mixed Reality Headsets--which, by the way, are very clearly not made by Microsoft, which is why they're called things like the "Samsung Odyssey" and the "Acer AH-101"--are very clearly aimed at games, seeing how VR has generally proven to be so prohibitively expensive that the non-gaming market reached practical buyer saturation a while ago (which is why PSVR, for example, has actually had ongoing success).
Hololens, which Microsoft literally manufacturers as a Microsoft product, and is called "Microsoft Hololens", is part of the WMR software ecosystem because it actually predates those third-party headsets and it would be kind of stupid for Microsoft to create two separate software brands and ecosystems for something as extremely niche as VR (+Hololens), especially given their status as the odd man out compared to Occullus and Valve. It is heavily focused on education and business (the website literally says "Mixed Reality Technology for Business", even though they've proven you can play some games on it. It's also multiple thousands of dollars per unit, because it's a stand-alone PC.
So they are separate things. To start, Microsoft clearly only makes one of them. For the others, Microsoft offered a technology standard they could adhere to (along with compatibility with Valve, etc.). And none of them are made for Xbox, which happens to be where Phil Spencer works. He didn't forget about WMR. He did (possibly) forget about PSVR, which actually has sold millions of units (specifically, about 4 million, or about 1 for every 25 Playstation 4s). But otherwise that's kind of like saying Microsoft manufactures video cards because every video card supports DirectX.
They have VR, but the Hololens, which while it can do VR is not truly a VR headset. The page isn't about their hardware, so much as featuring the VR support capability of Windows 10.
The page pictures hardware from Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, Asus(?) and Samsung:
Again, hardware being provided by other vendor partners.
The hololens has its own page, and is the only one they make. It also says it's the future of work. None of the content on the pages points to gaming, and their featured partners are primarily Xengineering and healthcare IT oriented thingers...
But the number one reason why it's not a consumer oriented product, but is geared toward enterprises:
Its like top gun/iron eagle for apache helicopters. So yes.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Blue Thunder?
Firebirds
pleasepaypreacher.net
Thunderbirds?
Kidd Thunder?
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
Steam | XBL
are go?
For as much as the internet balked at the idea of a pure boss rush game the run n gun levels are easily the worst part of Cup Head.
Basically, the game was the worst part of Cuphead. Graphics? Stunning. Inspired and executed to perfection. Music? Amazing. Atmosphere? Nailed it. Game? Nope.
Steam | XBL
Follow my leadah
JAFO
etc
The only thing I can remember is Nic Cage yelling 'I am the greatest' in the flight sim
10 year old me thought that movie was rad
lmao the gameplay is tight as fuck
4k/60fps (on One X) remasters of Vanquish and Bayonetta? Oh, don't mind if I do!
These are probably the PC ports that came out two or three years ago on Steam. I remember Vanquish had some big issues with gameplay stuff being tied to framerates but they got fixed up I believe.
"Basically" in the sense that there are two Bayonetta games, and neither of them are exclusive to the Switch.
Bayonetta 2, after all, came out on the Wii U like 4 years earlier. So whenever Bayonetta 3 comes out, it will be the first game to actually be console exclusive to Switch. I assume. Unless they pull a NMS, which seems unlikely.
"Basically" a Switch exclusive franchise. Maybe not so weird after all.
You aren't actually disagreeing. No-one would be talking about the game if it had the standard indie pixel art and chiptunes. However good the gameplay its easily the least notable aspect.
1) The Wii U never happened.
2) 2 and 3 being Nintendo exclusive is the point. That is what blocks things coming to PC, not which Nintendo system it happens to be on.
Yeah, the original Bayonetta is a Switch exclusive the same way Halo: Combat Evolved is an Xbox One exclusive. Except that it came out on an earlier console literally years beforehand.
Technically speaking, so is Bayonetta 2 though, given the 4 year gap between the Wii U release and the Switch. Granted, it's possible that not many people in this thread owned Wii Us (we have regularly ruminated about the Xbox One's weak sale numbers--but it still looks like it had more than triple the Wii U's sales despite coming out a year later). The future of Bayonetta strongly suggests Switch exclusivity, similar to the future of Gears of War--except with a lower likelihood of a PC port (and that past Gears of War games have never appeared on Playstation or on a Nintendo platform). As I've often said, we're firmly in the era of mutiplatform exclusivity releases, where Final Fantasy has long since left Sony exclusivity and every virtually every new Xbox exclusive appears in Xbox on Windows 10 (and sometimes even Steam!). Truly a changing era.
Then you are obligated to remind us--see above. Otherwise, we're not going to engage in the necessary doublethink. In the meantime, 50% of the Bayonetta franchise is on Xbox and Playstation (eventually to be 33%), and 0% is only on Switch.
As for pedantry being unnecessary...where do you think we are?
In keeping up the spirit of pedantry, we're in G&T and not D&D.
Now I want to change the thread's title to "Microsoft literally makes VR headsets, LMAO".
XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
To someone who wants to 1) wanted to play Bayonetta but 2) wasn't familiar with what platforms the game was released on, it's actually pretty pertinent (rather than pedantic?) information. Take half the statement--"Bayonetta is a Switch franchise." Someone who didn't own a Switch would, quite reasonably, conclude they couldn't play any game in the franchise. But that's not actually true. Seems kind of relevant. Making immediate information available to laypeople is a good thing in this thread.
Take the full statement--"It's weird that Bayonetta 1 is coming to so many platforms when Bayonetta is basically a Switch franchise." Except Bayonetta 1 already came to a bunch of platforms before it came to Switch, so why is that weird? An besides being relevant, it kind of seems self-contradicting to anyone who didn't already know...Bayonetta came to a bunch of different platforms. We do discuss what "exclusivity" means. It was in more than one of the OPs.
"The Wii U never came happened" doesn't strike me as "honest self-reflection" but you guys do you. I never owned a Wii U, so it's hard for me to weigh in. But I don't think it's pedantic pointing out that you can, in fact, play Bayonetta 2 on something besides a Switch; if you want you can buy both a copy of the game and the console on Amazon today. Is it good purchase for your money? Probably not? But I don't think that make it pedantic, especially after we spend more than a page discussing the viability of virtual reality headsets.
But I'm having fun with this--because I'm trapped at my desk with nothing better to do. The next time I say, "Ninja Gaiden, which is basically an Xbox franchise," I'm sure someone will take me apart too!
EDIT: God, I really want to rename this thread, "The Wii U Never Happened - A Thread for Honest Self-Reflection" but I'd hope the mods would come crashing down on it like vengeful gods.
Considering PSVR has a bit more than a third of the Wii U's install base, that would also make Phil "basically" right about VR. Even though it does look like a questionable thing to say when your company is still supporting WMR.
I'm also one of this thread's ESOL participants. So that might shape my use of "basically" rather than "mostly". Maybe I've been using "basically" wrong all these years--Still doesn't seem weird to see Bayonetta on Xbox One X again.
Then again, I'm pretty sure I was the first person to point how how Phil Spencer was "actually" mistaken--there are millions of sold PSVRs. At least I'm consistent.
edit: gaming specifically, it's going meaningful places in enterprise.