fixed. I'm sure Sony would have complied with Qriosity or whatever that shit service was/is(?) called if the NSA was knocking on their doors.

I bet at some point in time, Playstation Home has been monitored.

For it to be worthwhile to monitor Home, people would have to actually use it.

Hey it was popular there in the beginning. I danced like there was no tomorrow while I waited for a bowling lane.

What is this Home thing you speak of?

Yeah, that was the most ridiculous thing ever. "Because only one person can use a bowling lane or arcade game at once in real life, that's all we're going to allow in Home!"

Time to cross post the shit out of this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/G_xHueP7bQ0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You're that guy!

Well the soap opera .."As the World of Retailers Turns" continues.....

"Gamestop Still Accepting Pre-Orders for Xbox One"

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/a...one-again.aspx

Yawn!

I've been amused through all of this by the irony of everyone complaining about having an always-on camera/microphone in their home when they're likely typing those complaints on an always-on (and always-online) device that has a camera staring right at them and an open mic on the side. And PCs are much more hackable than a closed-system console.

Does it escape you that none of the cameras on these devices work when they are turned off?

My laptop sees nothing when it's shut. The 3DS sees nothing when it's in a drawer in the kid's room. Camera on the PC in the office? Typically comes with a shutter that covers the lens. My phone sees nothing when it's in my pocket(cue joke). None of them are pointed at the main hub of the house at all times either.

I know some like to stick their head in the sand for argument's sake to justify that these devices are comparable, but they really aren't.

I have no cameras pointing at me now. I have a tablet and a phone a single camera each. Phone is in a case. When in use camera is pointed away from me. Tablet is in a cover. When in use, camera can only see my face. If I had a webcam on my PC, it would be unplugged when not in use. Very easy since I'm sitting next to the PC.

I'm perfectly aware that cameras don't work when they're turned off. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

So what is the concern? Xbox watching you game when the camera is on? I don't fear Apple watching me poop as I compose this reply, and they're listed in the very same article along with Microsoft.

I'll pose my question a different way.

The NYC department of transportation monitors about 5,000 traffic cameras. This takes an entire staff of people working 24 hours a day and massive server space.

The Xbox 360 sold about 12 million units in its first 18 months of release.

Given the popularity of the console since its a safe bet that the Xbox One will sell that many units in its first two years.

Now, do you honestly think that a company who had two people in the same department, on the same team, at the same event, giving totally conflicting information about the piece of hardware they just revealed THAT DAY has the personnel, planning, knowledge and infrastructure to record 12 million brand new cameras 24/7/365 just to make sure we are all playing Halo instead of being terrorists?

And Apple didn't watch me type this, either. If the NSA wants information on you, Chloe doesn't just open up a socket and watch all your business.

The long and short for me is the idea that a camera is required for a console to work. That's just...weird.

If I tore my camera out of my laptop, I'm 99% sure the thing would still work. But if I'm vacuuming and knock the Xbox One Kinect camera behind the TV and it breaks, I have a non-functioning machine. Why is this dumb camera so important?

Because they want everyone to be able to program for Kinect, instead of making it optional and potentially doubling the work for developers. Like it or not, the dumb camera was a very popular piece of hardware.

I own a Kinect. My kids love it. I'm not confused why they are including it. It makes the thing too expensive but whatever. I just don't know why they are requiring it to be connected for the console to work at all.

Microsoft: ‘Shame on Us’ for Xbox One Messaging
Xbox One chief product officer Marc Whitten responds to fans’ concerns.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/...-one-messaging

Hmm, that article makes it seem like all the digital sharing stuff is coming for certain now, just going to take time. Actually pretty cool how they essentially added the feature of physical media and used/trades etc to be more friendly, while apparently keeping their original ideas in place for digital. Really hope they give us a reason to buy digital, with great sales and day one discounts, on top of the sharing abilities. That could be an easy win for the next generation. Add in the fact that MS is spending a billion dollars on XBOX One games, double what the entire Sony corporation earned in 2012

This doesn't make sense. Just because I have a Kinect hooked up doesn't mean I want to use it. So there's going to be double the work regardless (for non-Kinect games).

Meet the new boss...and a couple of surreal divisions outside of the Xbox etc division.

<iframe src="http://widgets.ign.com/video/embed/content.html?url=http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/07/11/meet-the-new-xbox-boss" width="468" height="263" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's the thing. They don't care if you don't want to use it. It's mandatory. A game can be programmed for motion controls only because everyone has to have their kinect plugged in. The choice shifts from "Do I want to use motion controls in this game or the standard controls?" to "am I buying this game that uses one control scheme that I don't like?".

Battlefield 4 is going to incorporate some Kinect features into the game, but the motion controls ain't one of them!