"Xbox TV" is one of life's bigger mysteries right now - well, providing you're so wed to technology that scouring a Microsoft job listing for specifications constitutes a solid evening's fun. The firm's designs on the broad entertainment market are widely understood (and in some cases, resented), but exactly how those designs will pan out over the next few years is a matter of some conjecture.
Cue issue 95's Hot Topic. Will Microsoft release a smart TV with integrated Xbox gaming tech alongside the next gen Xbox, as certain parties suggest? Will the manufacturer go so far as to produce its own shows? Here to discuss the ins and outs are the now-departed Matt Lees and Log, that scary bearded man who shouts at you on Youtube occasionally.
Matt says: NO!
What if one bit stopped working?
I'm not averse to the idea of being able to switch on my telly and jump straight into a game, but lumping bits of tech together isn't always a great idea. The camera phone might have proved a huge success, but those little pink televisions with built-in VHS players are as unpleasant as the bubonic plague.
I've always been a tech freak, and enjoy upgrading individual components. If I want a new TV but don't need a new console, having the two paired up might limit my options. I've also got loads of dull technical questions - like will the TVs include hard drive storage, or a slot for using DVD discs?
Cloud gaming is in vogue at the moment, so I'm inclined to guess that it would focus far more on downloadable games. For XBLA games a system like this would be perfect, but I don't fancy the idea of having to download an 8GB game just so I can play it without separate console hardware.
If the integrated tech can't do everything a proper Xbox console can do then I'm not interested, but even if it has exactly the same capabilities I've no idea where all of that hardware will fit. The HD screen I've got hanging on my wall is just about as big as I can manage - anything larger and the people I live with would quite rightfully start to kick off.
Flip the page for Log's rebuttal, and to vote in our poll. Ta to Gamrreview for the whimsical carousel image.
14 comments so far...
SkinnerChinner on 18 Jan '13 said:
No, because Egon said "crossing the streams is bad..."
FishyGinger on 18 Jan '13 said:
I thought Matt was dead to you all?
Alaric14 on 18 Jan '13 said:
Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Xbox / TV. TV / Xbox. I do not need more lines blurred in this world of media clusterf**kery, thank you, Microsoft. Keep making gaming and OS products, it's what you're good at.
OXM ETboy on 18 Jan '13 said:
We thought so too, but turns out that was a decoy.
Bezza89 on 18 Jan '13 said:
Logs argument is invalid - if he has multiple consoles and a separate TV thing under his TV then surely he'd need as many TVs as he does consoles. If he's saying having Xbox integrated into his TV will tie the room together, why not just have his xbox anyway? He'd just have one box under his TV. But by his silly rationale he'd have a PS3 TV, Xbox TV, commodore TV and apple TV TV. Or whatever he keeps under his TV.
In summary, there's no valid argument for having xbox integrated into a TV, it limits your options like Matt says. Having a basic xbox OS which allows for downloadable games and XBLA, well that's something else entirely.
SilentDark on 18 Jan '13 said:
A jack of all trades is a master of none.
That is all.
FishyGinger on 18 Jan '13 said:
That is all what?
Bezza89 on 18 Jan '13 said:
That's everything Fish, it's over now, we might as well just give up.
SilentDark on 18 Jan '13 said:
I suppose I should clarify. A machine that can do everything while nice on paper is certainly not going to be as proficient as several machines that can do each specific task.
Wanting one single machine that can do everything just because it looks tidier is a rather foolish thought. I'd rather a room littered with technology that each device performs it's task well than a single device that performs them acceptably.
Also, if you have the one machine that does everything when that machine fails (and in this world of substandard electronics it WILL fail) you lose everything, can't play games, can't watch TV, can't watch movies etc.
I can see how my statement seemed needlessly obtuse and I offer humble apologies for not making myself clear.
FishyGinger on 18 Jan '13 said:
Of course if you lose the TV then the xbox is still fairly useless. I get your point though I prefer separate devices. Just dislike the phrase. No need to apologise though we're all good here
Bezza89 on 18 Jan '13 said:
You were perfectly clear, me n fish were just ribtickling the 'that is all' last remark.
SilentDark on 18 Jan '13 said:
Well I supppose it can make for an attractive door stop
However it does seem both Microsoft and Sony are trying to move towards a fully integrated device. Both the PS3 and Xbox have increasingly marketed themselves as home media centres, with advertising typically showing the device being used in the living room (albeit the largest living rooms I have ever seen in my life) I think both companies are attempting to move in this direction. Whether or not this is a step too far remains to be seen.
Sandbwoy on 18 Jan '13 said:
It's an interesting idea, but there's no way an Xbox TV would be more popular than a stand-alone Xbox console. It might work for some people, but I think the majority of the gaming public would prefer the console to be seperate from the TV. I know I'd prefer it that way.
FishyGinger on 19 Jan '13 said:
I can see the appeal I really can. I have a smart tv, but something with a slot on the side for xbox discs...kind of makes sense really but microsoft would need to buy samsung first.
I wouldn't get one, but I can see the point.