Sorry I meant DirecTV not Dish, stupid names. And they sell the service separate from Madden, a majority of laptops have HDMI-output so I don't see it as much of an issue, unless they HDCP that stuff. Sport fanatics like having their sports everywhere, phone, tablets, laptops, etc; I'm not one of them.

There is a distinction between hardware and service, most notable when the hardware doesn't do anything a multitude of other devices can do, but yeah they can do what they want. It's similar to having a cable subscription, then being told you need to spend $500 in order to pay $15 a month for HBO. At which point you'll need to purchase a $400 LG TV to get Showtime at $50/year. And a $350 Sega console to get Starz for free. This of course is a total exaggeration and just demonstrating the point I was getting at originally.

I wasn't saying anything about it outside of it being lame and something I hope doesn't become a trend. Cheers.

To watch premium channels on cable/satellite, you have to buy the basic channels too. In a sense, you pay more than an Xbox One for premium cable, depending on how long you have it. It might sound worse to have something as an Xbox One exclusive show, but that has mainly to do with perspective, and not the real monetary value.

Which is where the argument for HBO Go a la carte is coming from. And cable internet is more expensive without cable. But once I have the channels, I can access it all from 1 piece of hardware.

Ultimately nobody actually cares right now because nothing has actually happened yet, and I'm sure it wouldn't sway me one way or another since I plan on getting an Xbox One regardless. Hardware-specific shows are stupid but it's Microsoft's right to do it. I'm just hoping nobody else jumps on board with the same idea.

A la carte is never going to happen. It would cripple the whole tv industry

I just don't get how it's any different than other exclusives. I don't care if it's hardware specific or not, exclusives are exclusives. I see where you're coming from, but if it means making money, I don't see why it matters if it's xbox one exclusive or not. A lot of things will be, and apparently this one is as well. But an exclusive tv show seems pretty insignificant in the long run.

Because I don't mind subscribing to multiple services, I do mind having to purchase, connect, and maintain specific hardware to watch specific shows. I don't want to have to watch show A in a certain room because it's only on Samsung TVs, show B downstairs because it's only on a certain LG toaster, other shows only on the Xbox One, Breaking Bad only on the PS4, and other programs an iPad. It's ridiculous to think hey, new Arrested Development! Available exclusively on Microsoft Surface.

But hey, if it's only available to Xbox Live Gold members but I can view it on my PC then sweet, that's fine.

That's it, that's all.

Like I said, I don't like what it could mean going forward. I don't see how what I don't like has any effect on Microsoft. It's an opinion and it doesn't effect Microsoft getting money from me one way or another (they're getting it regardless in this case)

I doubt Microsoft cares either, the question who be why do you care? No one is forcing anyone to buy anything. It's fine if you don't like that, but there were people out there who didn't like the idea of cable. And so on and so forth.

All will be available later in other ways, like Blu-ray. If that's not good enough, I don't know what is.

You're still missing the point that I was expressing an opinion and then explaining why it's a valid opinion. I care because I don't personally like it, I said that from the get go. Apparently you don't mind either way, congrats.

It never came up that it was a bad business decision, or that anyone would boycott Microsoft, or that Microsoft should care. In fact this has come full circle, and like I said from the get go, it's lame. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's a valid point, but how valid is another matter altogether. I'm perfectly capable of understanding your point, I just find it pretty irrelevant.

Absolutely. It's just as valid as yours.

Speaking of none of this, it's 2:30 PM in Tokyo, I thought TGS was going on - any news happening from that side of the ocean?

Let me distract you all from this Rich attack session with just the best news ever.

TGS: Microsoft on its Vision for Xbox One...
...And why that vision won't be reality at launch.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/...n-for-xbox-one

Basically, a bunch of great stuff won't even work at launch, deal with it, because it's not for us early adopters anyway.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure as long as it plays games at launch we'll all be alright. It is kind of funny all the TV features they were gloating about won't be ready though.

Yes, but my points don't have anything to do with an emotional response, whereas yours appears to contain. The idea of service vs hardware is more cut and dry, but in reality they are more inclusive than you think. I've used examples of how that occurs, and you dismiss it. I don't find that type of discussion as being balanced, but whatever.

The whole discussion about video doesn't even matter right now since we don't even know how locked down it will be by the time something actually gets released.

Naw not emotional as all, I just judge things off how much additional work is involved. I'm lazy, what can I say, and if I can't access everything from a singular device, then it's a step backwards.

Not that it matters, most everything worth watching generally gets released on Vudu, iTunes or Amazon the next day regardless of platform. There is something kind of funny about being able to stream House of Cards off Amazon.

Nope, fully speculative. I like discussing stupid shit, but I guess that was less discussing and more.. I don't know what that was. But hell, I don't even watch much TV, don't subscribe to HBO, and don't really care all that much.

I can't think of one singular device I can access everything from. If you know of one, please do share.

Cheap HTPC here, works well. But I can't access Pulp (Xbox 360 only apparently?), not sure about PSN stuff, haven't tried it.

Cheap htpcs are good for gaming? Not anything new.

Judging off Gamescom, I can run about 90% of next-gen apparently. Binding of Isaac 2!

I'm assuming Microsoft's program guide software will have a Roku 3-style search built-in where you can type in a show name and be taken to the streaming service that features it.

Well you go from xbox one to htpcs, it's hard to keep up or understand where you're coming from.

Right on. Really not complicated but it was fun just the same.

"Run" is the key word. How well though? Max settings? We must have different definitions for the word cheap.

Canistreamit can find streaming services too, what's your point? I never mentioned Microsoft's programming guide.

No, I mean I literally assume Microsoft's Program Guide Software will have it, it wasn't sarcasm - it just seems like a given at this point. And no you didn't mention it. I did.

And Sony's PS4 presentation at Gamescom (since Microsoft didn't have a formal presentation outside of that weird promo video thing) was mostly indie games which will run, very well, on most cheap laptops much less a cheap HTPC. Hence the reference to Binding of Isaac 2, a very low end game. I mean c'mon:



This was fun for a little bit, now it's not

That's 90% of the gaming market? C'mon, now this is just getting silly.

Indeed it is!

Pulling numbers from nowhere isn't an argument, just noise.