To me this is a pretty bad marketing / scheduling fail. I mean honestly who is going to want to show their game at the XBox reveal and then be "the game we already saw a few weeks ago" at E3 and get less coverage than all their peers during that week? Also everyone is crunching E3 video footage and it's usually down to the wire... who wants to do that three weeks earlier? I think that's why they were only able to show the usual sports launch titles and then Call of Duty because it would be covered up and down all E3 week anyway due to branding.

Better have a xna type replacement to develop on for xbox one. Or ps4 have a public sdk for us to work on. I will buy whatever console that offers this.

Pretty sure you'll be buying a 360

The name alone is likely to cause some confusion. I watched the debut live at Microsoft, and I'm not impressed personally as nothing really stands out IMO.

What about backwards compatibility with titles and arcade games? Will they just be abandoned? What about indie development support? I heard that Microsoft hasn't been treating their indies too well lately. Just asking because I didn't get to see the entire thing, just the uninteresting stuff by EA and Activision.

One word: fail.

I spent 28 minutes of presentation listening to idiots prattle about live TV and Skype. Do not care. Don't have or want cable TV.

Well, keep in mind that everything they showed with cable TV will likely work just the same with Video on Demand, Netflix, Hulu, HBO-Go, or whatever other non-cable subscription services you might have. In fact, a better way to look at it is that they're extending all the goodness they've already started with those services to your cable TV subscription, not the other way around.

Hopefully with better integration. We cut ties to the "cable" company months ago and apart from Game of Thrones, haven't missed a thing. Between Hulu, Netflix and Amazon we have pretty much everything we want covered. Just need HBO to get their act together and let me pay for their services without having to get a cable subscription.

Better have a xna type replacement to develop on for xbox one.

The Xbox One has 768 graphics compute units vs. 896 (+ 256 for compute only) in the PS4, both are DX11.1+ feature set, 8GB DDR3 + 32MB ESRAM vs 8GB GDDR5, and both are now confirmed to use 8 "jaguar" CPU cores from AMD.

And in the process, they re-affirmed that this generation is a two-company race. That's for those few who mistakenly believed the Wii-U was still in the competition.

It will be even easier to develop cross-platform titles between the two than it was the PS3.

Going off the released specs, I don't see very much of anything that seriously differentiates the two platforms. They have very similar compute power, nearly identical processors, and are not that different from high end off-the-shelf PCs apart from their operating system.

That means my life will be a whole lot simpler for the next console generation. Thanks!