Sessler's Soapbox: TV on Your Xbox?

Posted: October 11, 2011
Sessler's Soapbox: TV on Your Xbox?
Adam discusses the potential of video game consoles becoming multi-media set-top boxes and digital distribution.

Comments are Closed

  • AirPrime


    I would have to disagree with your assessment of the content through the console. I think that you are assuming a lot about the PC and how going through the console is any better. But, first I want to address the comment about having to have your PC talk to your TV. Not knowing what your setup is, but having your PC either stream or connect directly to your TV is relatively an easy task these days and only takes a few moments. I can stream content from my PC to the TV or Xbox within a few clicks. If I want, can get a third party application that does this and have it setup in a few clicks. However, you never really got into how you achieved this, which makes me wonder if it was to cause a stir.

    However, to get to the meat of your rant, the console will be treated like every other media device on the market, as dollar signs to Cable companies. What begs the question is, why? Why would you want to view content through your console, when there are plenty of other things that does the same thing, like your TV or a media box (etc, Roku, Apple TV, Blu-Ray Player, Sound bar, )? I would think you would be looking at those rather than a console for content. But, in this case, I can see the console being used as a secondary device in a room that does not have cable box or connection. But the problem becomes, what would you do when something happens to your console or you are unable to access the content you want to watch? How are you going to view your content? But, I don t see any real gain for the console, except as an extension of your cable-box. Here is the thing though; you are still going to need the Cable Company to have this to happen. Also, the bottom line is, that it would become just like the other stuff we stream stuff through, and that includes your TV.

    Posted: October 21, 2011 6:21 PM
  • TheyTarget

    Yeah, I always have this bad habit of buying one game that my PC just can't play and I end up having to play it somewhere else. Last example was oblivion, where I bought it for the PC and could just not get it to play at all. Time went on and eventually I decided I'm gonna upgrade my PC so I can play Crysis. Got maybe 30 minutes into the game quit out and installed oblivion. Never did beat Crysis.

    Posted: October 18, 2011 3:49 PM
  • Ailya

    G4 should be one of those channels.

    Posted: October 17, 2011 3:54 PM
  • JamesFinn1

    He's Cassandra? What does that mean?

    Posted: October 14, 2011 11:28 PM
  • oldscool

    What game is playing in the background?

    Posted: October 13, 2011 3:13 PM
  • R3$0n8

    I very much respect Mr. Sessler in many ways. But his assertion that "digital download" is something masses of people are looking forward to, I perhaps may have misunderstood his meaning, or else, shall have to disagree.

    Sony, probably microsoft as well, as I do not own a 360 I would not know, has already started offering the option to download games instead of buying them. This is a terrible idea. You take the competition from having walmart, target, bestbuy gamestoop,etc, having to try and undercut each other, while still having to deal with Amazon, you are going to have an impact on gaming. If you are a top tier gamer, buying games as soon as they hit the shelves, you have an addiction that is more expensive then crack cocaine. For the rest of us, we rely on GAMEFLY, the few remaining brick and mortar rental places, or wait a few months for the price to drop. You go over to a single availability platform, you tell the gaming companies they can get away with more. "You want our game? You pay our price, or tough luck"

    Now, the PS5. and the xbox 1440, thats a different story, by then we will have up and down speeds so fast that they stream gigabites of data in the time that it takes to buffer a low res youtube video today. You'll just have a gaming subscription and stream what ever game you want, and companies will make most of their money after market on add ons, which, admit it, as it is today, youll be paying 10 - 30 dollars to get the dlc for rage, a game that already costs 60 dollars, just so you can have a half decent ending. so the full game actually costs 90 dollars. thats about what the PSx costed when it first came out! (and candy bars were a nickle lol)

    There is also the problem of what comcast want's to do. Sessler says "well, the cable companies wont like this".... Oh hell, The cable companies are LOVING this idea. Its a wet dream. The end game is to be able to extort money from specific hardware and software developers. I am not a web developer. But there are ways of identifying your device and its operating system / internet browser across the network. Some of it is opt in, some of it is not. All comcast has to do is tell microsoft "We will give your products high tier priority, as long as you pay...and pay. and pay... In theory there are laws in place that are blocking that. For now. But not for ever.Also, from a logistical standpoint. It is hard to limit bandwidth to one device while giving high priority to another. Usually you have to neuter the home IP address.. but give it time...

    Well, this is how i feel.. Derp.

    Posted: October 13, 2011 12:53 AM
  • Acebravo

    The cable companies need to wake up. Look at what has happened with netflix. They have more streaming customers than they did a year ago. In general, most people are ok with having content readily avaliable when they what to watch it. Even the cable box providers have figured that on out to some extent. A la Carte tv is a no brainer. People don't want to schedule time to watch tv, thats just crazy. Its not 1950 anymore. People work around the clock and being able to watch what i want when I want legally....should have happened by now plan and simple. I agree charge more for the internet and get rid of the worthless box with channels I don't want but have to get because they're packaged with the ones I do want.

    Posted: October 12, 2011 1:32 PM
  • kings_legacy

    The major problem is that you system could be on 24/7 because it basically now your watching tv on it too. when you play the system several hours it gets hot and then you turn it off for a break (after 6-8 hours) then you go watch tv while it cools down.

    Now the idea of multi purpose systems seems like a great idea you just forgot if your gaming then go straight from that to watching tv, when is your system ever going to get a break/ its most likely going to overheat.

    As for the tv channels themselves I highly doubt there are going to be free to watch.

    Posted: October 12, 2011 9:59 AM
  • crocodilius

    i am totally going to re-try Witcher2
    when i get my next PC.
    oh, and TOR will run better ;o

    Posted: October 12, 2011 8:53 AM
  • Thogin

    GO Adam and getting a brand new PC!!!!

    Maybe Feedback will have more comments on games they play on it...

    Posted: October 11, 2011 11:41 PM
  • frankurban

    Cassandra reference. smooth.

    maybe someday people will believe your prophecies.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 7:42 PM
  • BoydofZINJ

    For the PC question, I traditionally buy a new PC when I am noticing my games are laggy or I can no longer have at lesat medium or high on all my graphics. The answer is YES! When I buy a new PC, the games that were laggy and/or not at HIGH graphics - I iwll check them out first.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 7:38 PM
  • Xiroh86

    a couple opinions:

    1) going to total digital distribution for games is something I am against. I can only imagine what size hard drive I would need in order to store and play games. I just recently upgraded my PS3 HDD to 500GB and the damn thing is almost half full.

    2) streaming tv, via programs like netflix or right from your console, is a great concept and i would totally take advantage of it, IF the price is right.

    3) the concept of completely phasing out cable/satalite broadcastng will never happen nor do I want it to. To much money is made via cable/satalite broadcasting for it to die out, and personally I tend to watch TV while I game.

    This is a very interesting developement in tech and I will be watching with a careful eye.

    Thanks for relaying this information Adam.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 4:44 PM
  • majred

    I agree with you completely Adam. Companies need to ditch the current TV distribution platform and move into an exclusively VOD platform. (except for maybe PPV events)

    VOD is the future. I never watch TV live anymore. I constantly have content recording on my DVR and I only watch stuff that is recorded. I hate sitting down in front of my TV 5 minutes after the hour and not be able to watch my show because I'm a little behind schedule.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 3:48 PM
  • flyingchicken

    Digital downlaoding won't happen in America for a long time. We don't have enough bandwidth to support that. This won't happen in 10 years.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 3:27 PM
  • SonyNmbrOneGuy

    So $60 gets you cable on your Xbox or is it $60+ $?? dollars to access those channels. The latter seems more likely considering every other pay service is only available on Live.

    Not saying it's a bad idea, just a pointless idea. This content is available elsewhere without the middleman fee of $60.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 3:25 PM

    The free-to-air broadcasters already stream content on the PS3 over here in the UK.

    Formats such as the BBC iPlayer allow you to watch either live, or recorded television.

    It works great, but your viewing experience is entirely dependant upon the quality your broadband connection, and i cant see things being any different in the U.S.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 3:22 PM
  • realdeftones1111

    HAND MOVEMENTS!!!!!! karate CHOP!

    Posted: October 11, 2011 2:55 PM
  • nutzViking

    Answer to Adam's sidenote question regarding acquiring new PC hardware and trying out older games in hopes of getting better performance:
    Oh my god, yes! That's almost always the first thing I do. Unfortunately though, after the initial reassurance regarding the potency of my new rig wears off, I crank up the graphics settings one more notch only to be transported right back to where I started - 21 frames per second laughing at my sad face :-(

    Posted: October 11, 2011 2:38 PM
  • oSAVA6Eo

    Maybe I'm too resistant to change but I do not know how companies are going to convince the average consumer to digitally download something and not have that item in it's physical form. I can take DVD's to my friends house there is no way that I'm taking a whole system.

    Posted: October 11, 2011 2:35 PM