Xbox One: not enough detail

[Eric]

It was revealed today!

Doesn't require you to be connected online! https://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/statu ... 5950231553

Does have mandatory installs! http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/05/x ... -analysis/

Does require a fee to active used games! http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/05/x ... -analysis/

Does have Call of Duty with a dog! WHOOO!

PS: (I'm bias)

[Zeus]

Deal breakers they didn't talk about:

1) if all games are saved on the cloud, do I have to pay for Xbox Live Gold (or whatever its called) to access my saved games? What if I lose my internet connection, I can't access my saved games?
2) DRM or always online: yes or no? I can't play games if I lose my internet connection? (is this why EA is getting rid of online passes?)
3) Activation codes: yes or no? PC-liked where they're linked to just one account (as Wired is suggesting)? If so, what if there's an offline co-op mode? Am I forced to sign in as a guest to play it?
4) how much internet bandwidth are we expected to use up for all this shit? Remember, some of us still live in a world of capped internet

These aren't small issues. These will be HUGE deciding factors to the majority of the population. Imagine your brother can't play the CoD game you just paid $60 for. No ability to trade in used games for new ones. Those are big issues to a lot of people.

Everything else they announced was pretty standard. Nothing really new (did you expect them NOT to include social shit?) or exciting (Kinect 2, Smartglass, TV hub.....*yawn*). What I am surprised at is if the rumour about always installing everything is true, that 500GB HDD might not be big enough. Is it gonna be full installs or just minor ones? If you start talking about installing every 20GB game (I imagine that'll be average size by then), you're gonna start running outta HDD space at just 25 games you installed. That's not even including any DLC or downloadable games. May end up being nothing but the way lazy developers are going, 500GB may end up being like the 80GB PS3s, just not big enough

Right now I have to say I'm not intersted in any way. Hopefully they ease some of my concerns for E3 but it don't look promising

[Zeus]

We posted at the same time! We should get one of the admins to merge them

Regardless, the Wired stuff is still a rumour. I need to hear them confirm or not. As for the not always online, that`s good. That was one of the concerns in my post

[Eric]

https://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/statu ... 2612122624

The Doritos Pope is on the case.

[Julius Seeker]

Any games for Seeker?

RPGs? Real RPGs! Ones with an actual RPG-style turn based battle system?
Kinect party type games?
Fitness games?
Simulation type games?
Fun two player games?

I know companies developing for Microsoft probably don't even know about platformers, so I won't even try.

[kali o.]

We posted at the same time! We should get one of the admins to merge them

Don't complain later that I unfairly mod edited your post or something....

For the record, this is a deal breaker for me. It is always online DRM, or close enough -- a one time activation on installation still means I don't own the content, even if we are just talking 25 years down the line. Because of the system, it by it's very nature (intallation, no disc required), means used games will be blocked. The only unknown is that they have not provided exact details.

Hello, Playstation. Been a few years, but I am back.

[Flip]

Any games for Seeker?

RPGs? Real RPGs! Ones with an actual RPG-style turn based battle system?
Kinect party type games?
Fitness games?
Simulation type games?
Fun two player games?

I know companies developing for Microsoft probably don't even know about platformers, so I won't even try.

Heh, nope, all sports, call of duty, and halo. Leave the real games up to the Xbox marketplace indie developers.

[Eric]

Phil Harrison via Polygon I think said you have to pay a fee to activate a game that's already activated, X-Box Support twitter said there's no fee.

Edit: Kotaku talked with Phil Harrison and just posted this 30 minutes ago.

http://kotaku.com/you-will-be-able-to-t ... -509140825

Full Price for new used games.

It sounds like they want to let you "sell" your new game digitally back into the marketplace so that they(Microsoft) have full control of it via licenses.

But what if you want to bring a game disc to a friend's house and play there? You'll have to pay a fee—and not just some sort of activation fee, but the actual price of that game—in order to use a game's code on a friend's account. Think of it like a new game, Harrison says.

"The bits that are on that disc, you can give it to your friend and they can install it on an Xbox One," he said. "They would then have to purchase the right to play that game through Xbox Live."

"They would be paying the same price we paid, or less?" we asked.

"Let’s assume it’s a new game, so the answer is yes, it will be the same price," Harrison said.

But that doesn't mean used games are dead. In fact, Harrison told us, you'll be able to sell your Xbox One games online.

"We will have a solution—we’re not talking about it today—for you to be able to trade your previously-played games online," Harrison said.

Edit 2: X-Box Support Twitter is backtracking now: https://twitter.com/XboxSupport/status/ ... 7404988420

[Eric]

This is such a wonderful train wreck, apparently the system does require you to be online at least once a day.

http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-does-require ... -509164109

[SineSwiper]

"It will be the same price."

[SineSwiper]

Let's look at the score:

Wii U - Fucking goddamn disaster after launch
XBox One - Fucking goddamn disaster before it's launched
PS4 - Who knows, but I'm sure Sony will fuck it up somehow

So far, it's looking like the best consoles are the 3DS and Steam+PC. IE: not consoles.

[M'k'n'zy]

I came out of the day fairly unimpressed. But I buy a console to be just that a console, and todays information mostly rotated around the media functions. Right now it's looking like this generation will be like last generation for me. I'll stick with my WiiU for now, and will likely pick up an xbox and ps4 down the road, but defidently not at launch.

BTW, they thought Nintendo calling their new system the Wii U was confusing, Xbox One may be worse. The whole reason that they didn't call the 360 the Xbox 2 was because they didn't want to seem inferior to Playstation (PS3 vs Xbox 2) so this seems a step backwards. And if you google Xbox One you get mostly sites for the original Xbox. Defidently confusing, if you ask me, but that's just my opinion.

Either way this year should be an interesting E3. Nintendo has already said that they will be having several Nintendo Directs prior to E3 including a big one before E3 where they will reveal the new 3D mario, Smash brothers, and Mario Kart for the Wii U. Xbox and PS4 will have to show me some games that are of interest to me. I don't play FPS, I don't play driving, I don't play sports, and I have seen little but that advertised for the new systems thus far. I'm just going to have to wait and see.

[SineSwiper]

I'm sorry, but some of these details are dealbreakers for me. I have to stand up for my rights and demand that a console doesn't fuck me in the ass just to play games on it. I don't care if it has best triple AAA titles or not. I'm not going to buy a console that forces me to be online, fucks over the used game market, and is riddled with DRM. Period.

I can put up with Steam's DRM because:

1. They have been strong-arming their developers into playing ball with the discount games market. In other words, games are not going to be $60 forever, like certain developers want them to be.

2. They have been a strong force in the promotion of indie gaming, including their Searchlight projects.

3. They have, in general, not been total dicks to their customers, unlike all of the console creators, who believe that they are ENTITLED to have gamers spoonfeed them money.

At this point, a Steam-based console could waltz in and totally dominate the industry.

[Lox]

I'm sorry, but some of these details are dealbreakers for me. I have to stand up for my rights and demand that a console doesn't fuck me in the ass just to play games on it. I don't care if it has best triple AAA titles or not. I'm not going to buy a console that forces me to be online, fucks over the used game market, and is riddled with DRM. Period.

I can put up with Steam's DRM because:

1. They have been strong-arming their developers into playing ball with the discount games market. In other words, games are not going to be $60 forever, like certain developers want them to be.

2. They have been a strong force in the promotion of indie gaming, including their Searchlight projects.

3. They have, in general, not been total dicks to their customers, unlike all of the console creators, who believe that they are ENTITLED to have gamers spoonfeed them money.

At this point, a Steam-based console could waltz in and totally dominate the industry.

Agreed. I was arguing with a coworker because he's willing to buy the XBox One "as long as a Halo game is ready at launch." It boggles my mind.

[Blotus]

PS4 - Who knows, but I'm sure Sony will fuck it up somehow

I'm sort of expecting this. Comment thread tards have been lauding PS4 as the new god in light of Microsoft's press conference. Even though Sony's presser was uniquely Western, we still must remember that Sony is historically bad at integrating UI, system operations, and online functionality. Not to mention their love of proprietary this and that, and things-nobody-cares-about (Home, remote play, console web browsers, connecting a printer to your console). Granted, the Xbox's UI is now just as, if not more cumbersome than the PS3's, and is similarly app-ridden.

However, I'm optimistic that this could be a rebound for them, as long as they listen to their Western partners.

[Julius Seeker]

Sony is being more conservative than Nintendo and Microsoft because: If Wii U fails, you'll see another Nintendo console; if Xbox One fails, there will be another Xbox; If the PS4 fails, you'll never see Sony develop a console again.

I agree with Sine though, none of the big 3 have the ball, so maybe another player will emerge: Valve? Apple? Google?

If any of these other three get involve, their console will most definitely be unlike anything you've ever seen before.

[Zeus]

I just think of it as one less system I have to worry about. I'm kinda relieved, actually

And the transfer of used games will carry a charge with it and will likely be set prices as opposed to an Ebay-like auction. The entire point is that the publishers and developers get a cut of the used sale. So it'll likely be EB-like pricing ($5 less than new) with a cut going to Microshaft and the publisher. So if you buy CoD for $60 new, you'll be able to sell it for $55 used but you only keep $30 with $5 going to Microshaft and $20 to the publisher. And you only get it as credit to your account. This way everyone gets paid and they don't hurt the new market

With all the games finally coming this year, I may get a Wii U at Black Friday. But I honestly see zero reason to get a PS4. Certainly not for the $500 or so they'll be asking

And Steam ain't no better. It's just a different market for consoles. Just because it works on Steam don't mean it'll be okay for consoles. I personally can't wait for Europe to legislate real ownership over digital content. I should be able to give someone my downloaded game if i so wish. I own that copy of it, transfer should be at my discretion just like a physical copy

[Julius Seeker]

I'm sorry, but some of these details are dealbreakers for me.

[Anarky]

And Steam ain't no better. It's just a different market for consoles. Just because it works on Steam don't mean it'll be okay for consoles. I personally can't wait for Europe to legislate real ownership over digital content. I should be able to give someone my downloaded game if i so wish. I own that copy of it, transfer should be at my discretion just like a physical copy

Stole this from Reddit because it is the perfect response.

-PC Gaming has never been about bringing your game to your friend's house and playing it on his PC.
-PC Gaming is rarely multiplayer/multiaccount on the same machine.
-Steam sells most of the games available on consoles for cheaper.
-Steam has massive sales and bundled sales where you can get games anywhere from 50-90% off retail price.
-Steam doesn't prevent you from installing mods on your games.
-Steam doesn't require an internet connection once the games have been installed.
More than one person can be logged into the same steam account at the same time. [EDIT: to be completely accurate, more than one person can use the same account at the same time, but only one can be logged in AND playing the games - but the point stands, one account can be used by multiple people to play the same games.]
-PC Gaming has never been about game resale.
-Console gamers have always relied on used game resales/trades/rentals.
-Console gamers have not had the requirement to be logged in to play single player before - for some gamers I know in rural areas, this is one of the reasons they own a console over a powerful gaming PC.
-Finally, I don't HAVE to use Steam to play games on my PC. I can choose to get them from ANYWHERE. You don't have a choice on the XBox One.

[Julius Seeker]

I don't necessarily disagree with the spirit of the response, but glancing over it I see a few very obvious problems:

For example "PC Gaming has never been about game resale." is completely false. Until about 5-7 years ago, PC game reselling was fairly huge.

Also points like "Steam has massive sales and bundled sales where you can get games anywhere from 50-90% off retail price." isn't something that Steam has over consoles. Depending on the retailer, you get these same sorts of deals - sometimes even better since bargain bins put games on for as low as $2.50. Even the Nintendo EShop has regular sales on games nowadays; even on Virtual console games, Super Metroid is going for 30 cents.

I am not really sure what the purpose of the first two points is supposed to be. "PC Gaming has never been about bringing your game to your friend's house and playing it on his PC." and "PC Gaming is rarely multiplayer/multiaccount on the same machine." only really serve to illustrate some clear disadvantages of PC gaming when compared to console gaming.

Then there are points like "for some gamers I know in rural areas, this is one of the reasons they own a console over a powerful gaming PC." which are probably BS. I live in a province with a lot of rural communities around, and I don't know of anyone in the past 10 years who hasn't had a high speed connection. You're talking about a technology which is nowadays almost as widespread as electricity in every westernized nation.

I've always seen the Xbox as geared more towards the traditional PC gamer than the traditional console gamer anyway.

[bovine]

The big lingering question that sticks with me is - since they are dropping all ability to play 360 content, both XBLA and regular games; does that mean they have the same attitude with the Xbox One as well? Am I going to turn on the Xbox One in 15 years and be unable to play any of its games at all because the xbox live servers have switched to the generation after it?

[Eric]

I've always seen the Xbox as geared more towards the traditional PC gamer than the traditional console gamer anyway.

The Xbox's biggest appeal has always been Live. The first xbox gave you a peak of that with the first 2 Halos, and the 360 was like "Online gaming is a big fuckin deal" right?

[Anarky]

For example "PC Gaming has never been about game resale." is completely false. Until about 5-7 years ago, PC game reselling was fairly huge.

I have never purchased a used PC game in all the years I've had computers. Probably because I'd just install a friends copy or pirate it when I was younger.

[Julius Seeker]

Until 5-7 yeara ago, just about every pawn shop in existence maintained a used PC games section. EB also maintained one until a couple years ago; and they were very large in the Sims/Broodwar era.

[Zeus]

This is apparently how the trade-ins will work

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013- ... apparently

Pretty much what I was saying although the final pricing model (and who gets what cut) will likely be different

[SineSwiper]

I'm sorry, but some of these details are dealbreakers for me.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: I hold no allegiances to any of the console makers. In fact, I could really only tell you the big companies I hate. I hate Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and Apple. They all suck. Just because one of them wins the console war this generation doesn't mean I'm going to jump up and down for their next console.

Google is about the only one I have some amount of respect for. And Steam. But that could change at the drop of a hat if they really try to screw over their reputation.

[Flip]

I've finally had my first Steam related problem when i bought a game yesterday and it simply does nothing when I hit play after it finished downloading. Retsarted the comp, updated my video drivers, kept trying to play the game, but it was not reacting at all. Verified the install was ok... and now i'm out of options.

I submitted a ticket to Steam but expect them to be totally useless as they tell me to clear my cache and stupid shit like that, so i'm not sure what to do anymore. Kind of annoying that their help is worthless.

[Eric]

What game

[Flip]

The Swapper.

[Eric]

One of these fixes might help. :o

1. Change your audio from 8 ch to 2 ch.
2. Go into My Documents/Facepalm Games/The Swapper 1000 and open CommonSettings.pro using Notepad. Find the line that says 'isFullscreen True' and change it to 'isFullscreen False'. You can change the window back to fullscreen once the game starts.
3. Find the Swapper directory (via Program Files), right click on the game application, select 'run with graphics processor' and click 'high-performance processor'. (This is the one that worked for me)

[Flip]

One of these fixes might help. :o

1. Change your audio from 8 ch to 2 ch.
2. Go into My Documents/Facepalm Games/The Swapper 1000 and open CommonSettings.pro using Notepad. Find the line that says 'isFullscreen True' and change it to 'isFullscreen False'. You can change the window back to fullscreen once the game starts.
3. Find the Swapper directory (via Program Files), right click on the game application, select 'run with graphics processor' and click 'high-performance processor'. (This is the one that worked for me)

I will be trying all sorts of stuff tonight, but i really hope i dont have to play the game in windowed mode to get it to actually run. The game makers are on it, though, as it clearly isnt an isolated problem for a game that isnt even a week old.

#2 worked for me, which is so dumb because once the game launched i switched it back to full screen in the settings and now it launches just fine right into full screen. It must be a resolution issue, because in the settings (once i got in) i also switched that from whatever really high resolution it defaulted to, to 1600x900 for my monitor.

[Shrinweck]

Hmm yeah that sucks but you can't really blame Steam for developer fucktardery or expect their support to be able to help you.

[kali o.]

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/main

Let's see what Sony does but I can easily walk away from console gaming next gen.

[Eric]

I can't, honestly the shit sucks. But there are entirely too many good console exclusive games(At least on Playstation) that I would not pass out on an entire generation for.

It's the same reason I bought a Wii for the handful of games on it I can't play on the 360/Playstation/PC.

Let's see what Sony does, at the very least we might be able to enjoy even more tears, between Microsoft, Game of Thrones, and potentially Sony, I might be good on tears for 5 years or so.

[Zeus]

And everyone thought nerds were just exagerrating. Like I said before, one less system for me to worry about. I'll be getting a Wii U later this year, let's see if $ony can make me care about the PS4

And here's another take: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/m ... -policies/

[Eric]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013- ... s-to-smile

Eurogamer had a good one too.

[Don]

The whole 'buying the game is not owning it' has been going on forever with MMORPGs. It's hardly a surprise they're pushing this elsewhere given nobody's actually done anything to challenge this for about the 10 years or so MMORPGs have been around. I mean if paying $15/month for however long and you still don't actually own anything on your MMORPG character, then why would you expect to own your game either?

Until someone challenges a big company on the concept of ownership consumers are likely to be screwed. I mean right now Blizzard could wipe out all your characters in WoW and cause the collapse of a billion dollar derivative market (gold trading) and they'd be able to say they don't owe anyone anything because none of this stuff has any value. So compared to that, the fact that you don't own your game doesn't even sound that crazy.

[Zeus]

Jesus Christ. Let me put this in caps so you guys don't keep confusing it:

PC GAMING MARKET AND HOME CONSOLE GAMING MARKET ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS

I don't give a fuck what works on the PCs, it's just not the same as consoles. Anyone who has spent a bit working in a games store will tell you that. You can't keep comparing what happens on PCs to what may or may not work on consoles, period.

What's really gonna be interesting is what happens in January when a whole bunch of Xbox Ones that were purchased for people are opened up at Christmas and people truly realize what not owning your game means. Nerds will know but they only make up 15-20% of the market. It's the parents/uncles/non-nerds who buy these then find out after the fact that make up most of the gaming market that'll really get the shock. That's when the shit will really hit the fan

[Don]

The ownership issue is exactly the same thing, and there are far more powerful parties in the PC market that'd like players to own what they buy (any of the RMT companies) as this legitmizes their business.

You're way overvaluing the ability to sell your game for $15 when you got tired of playing it or buy a used game for $20. The finanical motivation is nothing compared to RMT which is still more or less illegal precisely because you don't own the game you thought you did. A bunch of nerd rage over the fact that you no longer own you game is nothing compared to how long this has been going on in the RMT market, and the opposition here is actually well equipped to fight even the big companies (some estimate RMT market can be easily as big as the market itself that they serve).

Now the whole 'you don't own you buy' concept is ridiculous and probably will get struck down one day, but it's not going to be because you can no longer buy used game. Steam is a good example of having a platform where secondary ownership is almost unnecessary.

[Zeus]

You're way overvaluing the ability to sell your game for $15 when you got tired of playing it or buy a used game for $20.

Clearly you've never worked in a games store. Otherwise you'd never say something as silly as this when it comes to the motivations and needs of the customers.

Why the hell do you think Microshaft is leaving it up to the publishers? And why do you think it's already being assumed that most if not all publishers will "choose" (not willingly) not to blocked used games (source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/pachter-pu ... es-6409443). This is an absolute non-starter for the majority of the console market, which are a completely different group than the vast majority of PC gamers.

[SineSwiper]

Jesus Christ. Let me put this in caps so you guys don't keep confusing it:

PC GAMING MARKET AND HOME CONSOLE GAMING MARKET ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS

Let me put this in bigger caps:

THE PREVIOUS GENERATION OF CONSOLES AND THIS NEW GENERATION OF CONSOLES ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS!

So, if I'm going from one different thing to another different thing, I might as well go towards the thing that isn't going to shove a goddamn dildo up my ass to play.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013- ... s-to-smile

Eurogamer had a good one too.

Great article. If you buy this console, you are part of the problem.

[kali o.]

For Don:

An MMO is different - an MMO is a service, one which I pay monthly to access the servers which are required for functionality. Single player games being sold as a "service" has been something PC gamers still fight on an ongoing basis (such as single player games masquerading as online [SimCity 4], key activation/deactivation, limited installs, losing access to games [EA Origin], etc)

Why isn't a console game a service? Well, it can be - if a game has an online component...fine. I mean legitimate online components, not tacked on due to a framework behind the platform forced on the consumer. Otherwise, there is no question that single player offline games, especially those bought physically in the retail channel, are OWNED. The idea of a "license" is utter bullshit, peddled by media industries for years so they could eventually screw over the consumer when the technology allowed it (and the anus of the law and the public was sufficiently gently lubed and stretched), mostly in order to limit supply and control when the public moves on to new technology.

It's funny to me, because most of these consumers buying "licenses" are to young to legally enter into a contract anyway.

A single player game is no more a service than a copy of Batman on Bluray is a service. Period.

[Don]

Software as a service has been pushed as a concept for quite a while now. There's nothing fundamentally different from a MMO or any other software being pushed as a service, and if you look at RMT, you can easily argue MMOs ought to be the one where you actually own something because you spent the most amount of money on it, and the stuff in there provably has value. If Microsoft Word is supposed to be software as a service then surely any single player offline can be argued as such. It's not like I get any online value out of Microsoft Word.

Now SaaS obviously has a lot of resistance and I think it's just a thinly veiled way of trying to get more money out of your consumers, but I don't see anything wrong with arguing single players game should be SaaS given the other kind of stuff that apparently counts as SaaS. I don't see the whole ownership being big enough of a deal to matter on the single player front. If there's going to be any breakthrough it'd have to come on the RMT side. For example Diablo 3 recently had some gold dupe bug and that game you can directly sell gold for money. What should've happened is someone should've sued Blizzard for a billion dollars for hyperinflation wiping out the value of their investment. Of course people don't actually do that and the usual 'you don't own anything in Diablo 3' argument lets them get away with it, and as long as companies can get away with events that actually did destroy millions of dollars of value without paying a cent, any backflash from the inability to buy/sell used games is insignificant.

I saw this guy on a blog about cheating/security who says the current model of SaaS basically says the company can have your money and then ban you for whatever reason, so they have your money and you get nothing and basically commit legal robbery. In fact, if you're starting a new company, this sounds like a pretty good idea as you don't have to worry about reputation. Right now stuff is hopelessly in favor of the game companies that it's really pointless to argue about these things. The only way things might change would be from RMT because there are a lot of parties with money that'd certainly prefer players actually own the stuff they have as that legitmizes RMT.

[Zeus]

Jesus Christ. Let me put this in caps so you guys don't keep confusing it:

PC GAMING MARKET AND HOME CONSOLE GAMING MARKET ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS

Let me put this in bigger caps:

THE PREVIOUS GENERATION OF CONSOLES AND THIS NEW GENERATION OF CONSOLES ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS!

So, if I'm going from one different thing to another different thing, I might as well go towards the thing that isn't going to shove a goddamn dildo up my ass to play.

Of course each generation changes. But the market, and the customers that make it, hasn't. Trying to bring a PC mentality into console gaming is asinine, counter-intuitive, and potentially disastrous. Particularly when you're not even providing anything beneficial to a new potential customer base to replace the ones you're alienating

Why do you think Microshaft is trying to hide behind the "we'll let the publishers decide" bullshit? They want them to take the brunt of it

[Julius Seeker]

I'm sorry, but some of these details are dealbreakers for me.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: I hold no allegiances to any of the console makers. In fact, I could really only tell you the big companies I hate. I hate Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and Apple. They all suck. Just because one of them wins the console war this generation doesn't mean I'm going to jump up and down for their next console.

Google is about the only one I have some amount of respect for. And Steam. But that could change at the drop of a hat if they really try to screw over their reputation.

Heh, I know, I just wanted to use that gif at some point.

[Julius Seeker]

Killer Instinct 3!

[Eric]

Killer Instinct 3!

My reaction was similar ;p

[Anarky]

As excited as I am about Killer Instinct it looks like they dropped the 3D for a 2.5D style game. Not sure how I feel about it.

[SineSwiper]

As excited as I am about Killer Instinct it looks like they dropped the 3D for a 2.5D style game. Not sure how I feel about it.

KI was 3D? I mean, yes, the graphics was 3D, but it was still 2D gameplay.

Also, Killer Instinct is a weird thing to get excited about. Fighting games are dead, yo.

[Eric]

KI's "3D" was largely irrelevant to the gameplay, and the size of the ring was always the same no matter where your character ended up, it was basically a 2D fighter.